ybraty 

New 
Colleqe 

f 

Aqriculture 


University  of  Illinois 

Library  at 

Urbana-Champaign 
ACES 


UNIVERSITY  LIBRARY 

UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS  AT  URBANA-CHAMPAIGN 

Lhnl^T^aL9i?9  !his  .material  is  responsive  for  its 


journals. 


Theft,  mutilation,  and  underlining  of  books  are  reasons 


he  U±  ±P/ti0n  and  may  reSUlt  in  dismissal  rn 
the  University.  Please  note:  self-stick  notes  may  result 
in  torn  pages  and  lift  some  inks. 


84fi  9fi9Vi^in ^        !Pn°ne  U6nter  at  217-333-8400, 

K)-2b2-1510  (toll-free)  orcirclib@uiuc.edu 
Renew  online  by  choosing  the  My  Account  option  at- 
http://www.library.uiuc.edu/catalog/ 


$>$ 


m 


UNIVERSITY  OF  ILLINOIS 

Agricultural  Experiment  Station 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


PASTEURIZATION  AS  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING 

BUTTER  FROM  CREAM  SKIMMED 

ON  THE  FARM 


BY  CARL  E.  LEE 


URBANA,   ILLINOIS,   SEPTEMBER,   1909 


SUMMARY  OF  BULLETIN  No.  138 

1.  In  1905,  the  comparisons  represented  by  one  tub  of  butter  from  each  churn- 
ing and  scored  by  only  one  judge,  gave  an  average  of  seven-tenths  (0.7)  of  one 
point  higher  score  in  favor  of  the  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized  cream. 

2.  During  four  months  in  storage  the  butter  made  from  unpasteurized  cream 
decreased  in  quality  0.3  and  the  butter  from  the  pasteurized  cream  0.45  of  one 
point. 

3.  The  1906  butter  inspected  upon  arrival  in  Chicago  gave  an  average  score 
of  0.5  of  one  point  in  favor  of  the  butter  made  from  the  unpasteurized  cream. 
Twenty-six  days  after  the  last  lot  of  butter  was  made  it  was  again  scored  by  two 
judges,  with  an  average  of  0.97  and  0.27  of  one  point  respectively  in  favor  of 
the  unpasteurized  butter. 

4.  After  the  butter  had  been  in  storage  another  101  days  it  was  again  ex- 
amined by  the  same  men.    According  to  one  of  these  judges,  there  was  no 
difference   in   the    decrease   of    quality   between   pasteurized    and   unpasteurized 
butter,  while  the  average  of  all  the  scores  by  the  other  judge  showed  that  the 
butter  made  from  the  pasteurized  cream  decreased  in  quality  0.71  of  one  point 
more  than  the  butter  made  from  unpasteurized  cream. 

5.  The  104  tubs  of  1907  butter  were  scored  by  five  judges  44  days  after  the 
first  lot  was  made.    According  to  three  of  these  judges  the  unpasteurized  butter 
scored  higher  by  0.56,  0.27  and  0.10  of  one  pojnt  respectively.     The  other  two 
judges  scored  the  pasteurized  butter  higher  by  0.3  and  0.41  of  one  point.    Fol- 
lowing a  period  of  four  months  in  storage  this  butter  was  rescored  by  four  of 
the  former  judges.    According  to  three  of  them  the  unpasteurized  decreased  in 
quality  0.13..  0.72  and  0.04  of  a  point  more  than  the  pasteurized  butter,  while  the 
fourth  judge  scored  the  unpasteurized  butter  higher  by  0.34  of  one  point. 

6.  The  1908  comparisons  were  represented  by  160  tubs  of  butter  shipped  to 
both  the  Chicago  and  New  York  markets.    The  butter  shipped  to  Chicago  was 
scored  by  five  different  judges,  thirteen  days  after  the  last  butter  was  made  with 
the  following  average  results :  Two  of  the  judges  favored  the  pasteurized  butter 
by  0.2  and  0.1  of  one  point  respectively.     After  six  to  seven  months  in  storage 
this  same  butter  was  rescored  by  four  of  these  same  judges.     The  butter  made 
from  the  unpasteurized  cream  decreased  to  the  extent  of  0.15,  2.02,  0.25  and  0.65 
of  a  point  respectively,  more  than  did  the  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized 
cream. 

7.  The  butter  that  was  shipped  to  New  York  was  scored  by  one  judge  before 
it  was  placed  in  storage  with  the  result  of  0.1  of  one  point  in  favor  of  unpas- 
teurized butter.    According  to  this  same  judge  the  unpasteurized  butter  decreased 
in  storage  0.35  of  one  point  more  than  the  pasteurized  butter.    The  average 
of  all  the  scores  placed  upon  this  butter  after  storage,  by  four  judges,  was  1.51 
points  in  favor  of  the  pasteurized  butter. 

8.  Pasteurization  does  not  affect  the  body  or  texture  of  butter.     Curdling  of 
cream  by  pasteurization  increases  the  loss  of  fat  in  buttermilk.     Pasteurization 
reduces    the    viscosity    of    sour    cream    and    produces   buttermilk    of    a    watery 
appearance. 

Pasteurization  does  not  improve  the  quality  of  butter  made  from  sour 
farm-skimmed  cream. 


368 


PASTEURIZATION   AS  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING 

BUTTER  FROM  CREAM  SKIMMED 

ON  THE  FARM 

BY  CARL  E.  LEE,  ASSISTANT  CHIEF  IN  DAIRY  MANUFACTURES 

INTRODUCTION 

For  the  past  four  years  the  Illinois  Agricultural  Experiment  Sta- 
tion has  been  studying  the  problems  relative  to  the  quality  of  butter 
manufactured  in  our  creameries  from  farm-skimmed  cream.  The 
change  from  the  whole  milk  to  the  cream  gathering  system  has  resulted 
in  a  decline  in  quality  of  butter.  There  is  some  doubt  as  to  the  real 
cause  of  this  deterioration,  but  it  is  needless  to  say  that  a  greater  effort 
should  be  exerted  toward  the  improvement  of  a  condition  so  important 
to  the  public. 

In  this  connection  the  following  demand  consideration. 

1.  Is  there  danger  in  allowing  the  farmer  to  keep  cream  until  it 
deteriorates  in  quality  before  it  is  delivered  to  the  creamery? 

2.  Does  the  age,  flavor,  and  acidity  of  cream  when  delivered  to 
the  buttermaker,  affect  the  quality  of  the  butter? 

3.  What  effect,  if  any,  does  the  place  where  the  milk  is  skimmed, 
have  upon  the  flavor  of  creamery  butter? 

4.  Is  there  anything  that  can  be  done  in  the  factory,  where  this 
cream  is  churned,  that  might  overcome  the  above  mentioned  defects? 

Naturally  the  benefit  that  might  be  derived  from  the  proper 
handling  of  the  cream  on  the  farm  has  not  been  overlooked  in  this 
work.  Pasteurization  of  farm-skimmed  cream  has  been  advocated  in 
the  past  but  no  facts  are  available  to  show  that  butter  made  from  such 
cream  has  been  improved  by  pasteurization  alone. 

PRELIMINARY    OBSERVATIONS 

The  first  part  of  the  work  consisted  in  a  preliminary  study  of 
the  methods  of  handling  cream  in  the  creameries  thruout  the  State. 
Facilities  for  studying  pasteurization  were  found  in  many  of  the  plants 
affording  ample  opportunity  for  a  general  survey  of  the  systems 
now  in  use. 

Personal  observations  were  made  of  the  butter  from  factories 
where  all  the  cream  was  pasteurized  and  this  butter  was  compared 
with  the  product  of  creameries  where  pasteurization  was  not  practiced. 
The  cream  at  the  various  factories  was  in  general  of  the  same  quality, 
but  some  butter  made  from  pasteurized  cream  scored  higher  than  that 

369 


370  BULLETIN  No.  138  [September, 

from  unpasteurized.    The  opposite  was  also  true.    From  observations 
thus  obtained,  the  following  ideas  were  formed. 

1.  Pasteurized  cream  seemed  to  have  the  cleaner  flavor. 

2.  Butter  made  from  pasteurized  cream  was  improved  in  quality 
from  one  to  two  points. 

3.  There  was  no  apparent  difference  in  the  body  of  the  butter 
made  from  pasteurized  or  unpasteurized  cream. 

4.  Pasteurization  curdled  thin  sour  cream. 

5.  The  curdling  of  cream  by  pasteurization  increased  the  loss 
of  butter  fat  in  the  buttermilk  from  0.3  to  1.0  percent. 

6.  Where  no  curdling  took  place  there  was  no  greater  loss  in 
the  buttermilk  from  pasteurized  cream. 

7.  The  amount  of  curdling  varied  with  the  make  of  pasteurizer 
used. 

8.  Curdling  would  increase  on  sour  cream  when  the^  percent  of 
fat  was  below  30. 

9.  The  rapidity  with  which  the  cream  was  heated  to  a  tempera- 
ture of  180°  F.  was  an  important  factor  in  reducing  curdling. 

10.  Factories  in  the  same  locality,  making  butter  from  unpasteur- 
ized cream  sold  their  product  for  the  same  price  per  pound  as  did 
those  factories  making  butter  from  pasteurized  cream. 

11.  The  quality  of  the  butter  decreased   as  the  quality  of  the 
cream  received  at  the  factory  decreased. 

12.  Pasteurization   greatly   increased   the   labor   and   expense   of 
operation  in  the  small  creameries. 

After  all  these  observations  regarding  quality  of  the  butter  there 
were  still  no  data  upon  which  to  base  conclusions.  The  writer  had 
been  the  only  judge  of  quality,  and  the  butter  in  this  comparison  had 
not  been  made  from  cream  of  identical  grade.  Butter  made  from  the 
same  vat  of  cream  one-half  pasteurized  and  the  other  not,  had  never 
been  submitted,  side  by  side,  to  market  inspection.  The  product  made 
in  two  different  factories  or  in  the  same  factory  on  two  separate  days, 
was  not  comparable,  for  it  could  undoubtedly  be  said  that  the  cream 
in  one  or  the  other  might  have  had  advantage  in  flavor. 

Investigational  work  in  the  manufacture  of  butter  must  be  con- 
ducted with  the  utmost  care.  The  factors  that  influence  results  are 
vefy  numerous,  complex,  and  difficult  to  eliminate. 

GENERAL   PLAN 

Since  the  previous  work  was  too  general  and  not  exhaustive  to  a 
conclusive  degree,  it  was  continued  further,  as  follows : 

Quality  of  butter  made  from  pasteurized  sour  cream  was  com- 
pared with  quality  of  butter  made  from  the  same  grade  of  cream  not 
pasteurized.  The  two  lots  of  cream  for  each  day's  comparison  were 
handled  in  <as  nearly  the  same  manner  as  circumstances  would  permit, 
and  in  no  case  was  cream  used  unless  it  was  first  thoroly  mixed  and 
then  divided  into  two  lots,  one  to  be  pasteurized  and  the  other  left 
unpasteurized. 


1909]  PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER  371 

The  general  method  of  treating  the  cream  and  making  the  butter 
was  the  same  for  both  the  pasteurized  and  unpasteurized,  except  as 
noted  under  1906,  when  for  the  first  five  days  of  that  year's  work, 
starter  was  added  to  the  pasteurized  cream  and  none  to  the  unpasteur- 
ized. Thruout  the  experiment  the  object  was  to  make  butter  that 
would  score  perfect  in  workmanship.  In  this  we  were  successful, 
since  all  the  cuts  in  scores  were  made  on  flavor  alone. 

BUTTER  TO  BE  JUDGED 

In  the  first  two  years'  work  of  the  experiments,  one  churning 
was  made  each  day  of  pasteurized  cream  and  one  of  unpasteurized. 
One  60-pound  tub  of  butter  was  packed  from  each  churning. 

In  1907,  all  the  cream  received  each  day  was  divided  into  two  lots, 
one  of  which  was  pasteurized.  Both  the  pasteurized  and  unpasteurized 
lots  of  cream  from  vats  8  and  11  were  cooled  and  churned  two  hours 
later.  From  the  other  12  vats  the  pasteurized  and  unpasteurized 
cream  was  cooled ;  one-half  of  each  lot  was  churned  a  few  hours  later 
and  the  remainder  of  the  cream  in  each  lot  churned  the  next  morning 
and  two  tubs  of  butter  packed  from  each  churning. 

In  handling  this  cream  four  tubs  of  pasteurized  butter  are  com- 
pared with  four  tubs  of  unpasteurized  butter. 

In  1908,  for  each  of  the  twenty  comparisons  the  pasteurized  cream 
was  also  churned  in  two  churnings.  From  each  churning  four  tubs 
of  butter  were  packed ;  two  of  which  were  shipped  to  Chicago  and  the 
other  two  to  New  York  City.  The  unpasteurized  cream  was  handled 
in  the  same  manner,  giving  16  tubs  of  butter  for  each  comparison. 

All  of  the  butter  was  scored  soon 'after  the  last  lot  was  made.  It 
was  again  scored  after  several  months  in  storage  in  order  to  determine 
its  keeping  quality.  The  butter  made  in  1907  and  1908  was  judged  by 
a  greater  number  of  judges  than  that  of  the  previous  two  years.  In 
each  case  the  name  of  the  person  acting  as  judge  is  recorded  over  his 
score. 

MEANS  AND  METHODS  OF  RATING  QUALITY 

As  previously  stated,  the  first  two  years'  work  was  represented  by 
one  tub  of  butter  packed  from  each  churning.  It  was  evident  from 
the  results  obtained  by  comparing  the  various  scores  on  this  butter, 
that  there  was  a  difference  in  the  score,  placed  upon  the  same  package 
by  different  judges.  It  was  also  evident  that  one  man  might  favor 
the  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized  cream  while  another  judge  might 
favor  the  butter  made  from  unpasteurized  cream.1  This  led  to  the 
belief  that  standards  varied  with  different  judges  or  that  their  taste 
and  perception  for  detecting  flavors  were  unlike. 

It  is  not  to  be  expected  that  a  judge's  score  on  a  package  of  butter 
is  infallible  for  the  reason  that  the  taste  is  variable  from  day  to  day 
and  that  what  may  be  standard  for  one  judge  may  not  be  for  another. 
At  best  the  score  is  an  estimate  rather  than  actual  measure  of  the 
quality  of  the  butter  in  question.  The  chemist  may  determine  the  exact 
amount  of  salt  or  fat  in  a  sample  of  butter,  but  there  are  no  mechan- 


372  BULLETIN  No.  138  [September, 

ical  weights  or  measures  by  which  a  judge  can  determine  quality  or 
flavors  with  anything  like  the  same  degree  of  accuracy.  If  Mr.  A 
should  place  a  score  of  92  on  the  pasteurized  and  93  on  the  unpasteur- 
ized butter,  it  could  not  be  said  that  the  butter  receiving  the  highest 
score  was  one  point  better  in  quality.  If  perchance  Mr.  B  should 
reverse  this  decision  the  average  of  these  scores  would  not  signify 
that  there  was  no  difference  in  quality. 

A  study  of  the  tabulation  of  all  the  scores  obtained  on  this  butter 
leads  one  to  believe  that  if  the  score  on  a  certain  tub  was  92  it  simply 
means  that  it  would  fall  within  the  limits  of  91  and  93  or  in  rare  in- 
stances 90  and  94. 

Since  these  variations  and  irregularities  must  always  be  reckoned 
with,  the  task  of  eliminating  this  influence,  or  reducing  it  to  a  mini- 
mum, was  undertaken  in  1907  and  1908,  by  employing  a  greater  num- 
ber of  judges,  and  by  using  duplicate  churnings  from  each  lot  of  cream 
as  well  as  duplicate  tubs  from  each  churning. 

For  example,  May  6,  the  comparison  might  have  been  represented 
by  one  tub  of  butter  from  each  of  the  pasteurized  and  unpasteurized 
lots  of  cream.  We  would  then  have  had  from  Table  21,  May  6,  1908, 
pasteurized  butter  tub  No.  201,  unpasteurized  butter  tub  No.  205. 

As  a  matter  of  fact,  it  was  represented  by  two  churnings  from 
each  lot  and  two  tubs  from  each  churning  for  two  different  markets, 
making  a  total  of  16  tubs  for  comparison. 

Example,  May  6,  1908,  from  Tables  21  and  32 

Tubs  pasteurized  butter  Tubs  unpasteurized  butter 

901  909  9O^  9O/^ 

203  Chicago  2Q4  Chicago  2Q7  Chicago  20g  Chicago 

Churn  Churn  Churn  Churn 

1     401  New  York     2     "402  New  York       3     J°*  New  York     4     J°f  New  York 

In  the  same  manner  the  scores  might  all  have  been  placed  by  one 
judge,  thus  giving  the  score  on  the  one  tub  as  against  an  average  of 
the  scores  placed  on  8  tubs. 
Example,  from  Table  21. 

Pasteurized,  tub  201,  score  by  Crawford,  July  14,  1908,  93. 
Unpasteurized,  tub  205,  score  by  Crawford,  July  14,  1908,  93. 
Score  in  the  8  tubs,  same  judge,  July  14,  1908: 

Pasteurized  Unpasteurized 

Tub  No.  Score  Tub  No.  Score 

201  93  205  93 

203  93  207  93 

202  93  206  93 

204  93  208  92.5 

The  same  comparison  could  be  made  for  any  of  the  20  days.  By 
employing  five  judges,  errors  are  further  eliminated  by  having  20 
scores  on  the  4  tubs  as  against  5  scores  on  the  one  tub  of  either  pas- 
teurized or  unpasteurized  butter. 

Example  from  Table  21.    Butter  made  May  6,  1908. 


1909]  PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER  373 

If  only  one  tub  had  been  packed  the  results  would  have  been  as 
follows : 

First  tub  packed  from  pasteurized  cream  was  numbered  201  and 
was  scored  by  5  judges,  July  14,  1908,  as  follows: 

93;  94;  923/4;  93^;  92^.    Average  93.15. 

First  tub  from  unpasteurized  butter  No.  205. 

93 ;  94 ;  93 ;  94 ;  93.    Average  93.4. 

Tabulation  of  scores  made  by  same  5  judges  July  14,  1908,  on 
four  tubs  of  butter  representing  the  same  cream. 

Pasteurized  lot  from  Table  21. 

Scores 

Lee 
92.50 
93.00 
93.00 
93.00 


Tub  No. 

Crawford 

Newman 

McKay 

Woolverton 

201 

93.00 

94.00 

92.75 

93.50 

203 

93.00 

92.00 

91.50 

93-.  00 

202 

93.00 

93.00 

92.25 

93.50 

204 

93.00 

92.50 

92.50 

93.50 

Average  of  the  20 

scores,  92 

.87. 

Unpasteurized  lot. 

Scores 

Tub  No. 

Crawford 

Newman 

McKay 

Woolverton 

205 

93.00 

94.00 

93.00 

94.00 

207 

93.00 

93.00 

91.00 

93.00 

206 

93.00 

93.00 

92.75 

92.00 

208 

92.50 

91.50 

92.25 

93.00 

Lee 
93.00 
93.50 
93.00 
92.50 
Average  of  the  20  scores,  92.8. 

From  the  first  line  of  Table  23,  the  folowing  data  is  obtained  as 
a  summary  of  the  above  scores : 

Tub  No.  Average  Highest  Lowest 

201-204  92.87  94.00  91.50          Pasteurized  butter 

205-208  92. 8C  94.00  91.00          Unpasteurized  butter 

The  butter  in  each  case  except  1906  was  made  by  the  writer  and 
the  regular  buttermakers  at  each  place. 

AUGUST  7  TO  25,  1905 

The  first  six  experimental  churnings  were  made  at  the  John 
Newman  Company's  creamery  at  Freeport  and  the  remaining  fourteen 
churnings  were  conducted  at  their  Galena  plant. 

Each  day's  cream  was  thoroly  mixed  and  then  divided  into  two 
equal  quantities ;  one  of  these  was  pasteurized  to  a  temperature  rang- 
ing from  160°  to  180°  F.  and  then  cooled  at  once  to  a  temperature  of 
44°  F.  The  other  was  placed  in  the  ripening  vat  unpasteurized.  The 
cream  when  delivered  varied  in  acidity  from  0.54  to  0.72  percent,  and 
the  fat  from  28  to  35  percent.  See  Table  4. 

No  starter  was  added  to  the  cream  that  was  churned  the  first  day. 
But  each  succeeding  day  from  4  to  5  percent  of  starter  was  added  to 
both  the  pasteurized  and  unpasteurized  cream.  After  the  cream  had 
been  cooled  it  was  held  from  8  to  12  hours  and  then  churned  at  a 
temperature  of  47°  to  48°  F.  The  unpasteurized  cream  was  cooled, 
held,  and  churned  at  the  same  temperature  as  the  pasteurized. 


374 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


One  60-pound  tub  of  butter  was  taken  from  each  churning  and 
stored  with  the  Monarch  Refrigerating  Company,  in  Chicago.  Sep- 
tember 6  the  20  tubs  were  judged  by  John  Mittelstadt  of  the  Chi- 
cago Butter  and  Egg  Board,  assisted  by  J.  B.  Newman,  of  the  firm  of 
W.  S.  Moore  and  Company.  • 

TABLE  1.    RESULT  OF  SCORING  SEPTEMBER  6,  1905 


TJnpasteurized 

Pasteurized 

Tub  No. 

Score 

Tub  No. 

Score 

Tub  No. 

Score 

Tub  No. 

Score 

1 
3 

5 
7 
9 

91.50 
91.50 
91.00 
86.00 
87.00 

11 
13 
15 
17 
19 

87.50 
86.00 
87.00 
87.50 
86.00 

2 
4 
6 
8 
10 

92.00 
93.00 
92.00 
86.50 
87.50 

12 
14 
16 
18 
20 

88.00 
86.50' 
88.00 
87.50 
86.50 

Average  . 

« 

88.05 

|    88.75 

For  every  day's  make,  the  pasteurized  butter  scored  higher  than 
the  unpasteurized  by  one-half  to  one  and  one-half  points. 

January  5,  four  months  later,  the  butter  was  again  scored  by  John 
Mittelstadt  and  John  Crawford. 

TABLE  2.     RESULT  OF  SCORING  BUTTER  JANUARY  5,  1906 


Unpasteurized 

Pasteurized 

Tub  No. 

Mittelstadt 

Crawford 

Tub  No. 

Mittelstadt 

Crawford 

1 

90.50 

92.00 

2 

91.00 

91.00 

3 

90.50 

92.00 

4 

92.00 

91.00 

5 

91.00 

91.00 

6 

90.50 

90.00 

7 

85.00 

86.00 

8 

85.50 

88.00 

9 

86.00 

85.00 

10 

88.00 

86.00 

11 

86.50 

87.00 

12 

87.50 

90.00 

[13 

85.00 

82.00 

14 

85.50 

84.00 

15 

86.00 

83.00 

16 

88.00 

90.00 

17 

86.50 

85.00 

18 

87.50 

87.00 

19 

85.50 

.86.00 

20 

87.50 

89.00 

Average.  .  .  . 

87.25 

86.90 

88.30 

88.60 

According  to  the  scoring  by  Mittelstadt,  the  butter  made  from  the 
pasteurized  cream  was  1.05  of  a  point  better  in  quality,  and  according 
to  Crawford's  scoring  1.7  of  a  point  better  than  the  butter  made  from 
the  corresponding  lots  of  unpasteurized  cream. 

The  greatest  difference  found  between  the  butter  made  on  the 
same  day  was,  according  to  Mittelstadt's  scoring,  2  points  and  Craw- 
ford's 7  points. 

TABLE  3.    CHANGE  IN  QUALITY  ACCORDING  TO  FIRST  AND  SECOND 
SCORING  BY  MITTELSTADT 


U  npasteurized 

Pasteurized 

Unpasteurized 

Pasteurized 

Vat 
No. 

Gain 

Loss 

Gain 

Loss 

Vat 
No. 

Gain 

Loss 

Gain 

Loss 

1 
2 
3 
4 
5 

Same 

1.0 
1.0 
Same 
1.0 
1.0 

o'.s 

1.0 
1.0 
1.5 

6 
7 
8 
9 
10 

1.0 
1.0 
1.0 
0.5 
0.5 

Same 
Same 
1.0 

.05 
1.0 
Same 
Same 

1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


375 


According  to  Table  3  one  tub  of  butter  made  from  unpasteur- 
ized,  and  two  tubs  from  pasteurized  cream,  did  not  change  in  quality. 
Two  tubs  of  butter  made  from  unpasteurized  and  one  from  pasteurized 
decreased  in  quality  one-half  of  a  point.  Seven  tubs  made  from  the 
unpasteurized  and  four  from  pasteurized  cream  decreased  in  quality 
one  point.  One  tub  of  butter  from  pasteurized  cream  decreased  1.5 
points,  one  gained  1.0  point  and  another  0.5  of  one  point. 

TABLE  4.     CHURNING  DATA 


Vat 
No. 

Acidity 
of 
Cream 

Per 

cent 

Av'ge  percent 

Temperature 

Hours 
cream 
was 
held 

Effect 
of 

pasteuriza- 
tion 

Loss  in  buttermilk 

Fat 

Starter 
added 

Cream 
cooled 
to 

Cream 
churned 
at 

One-half 
cream 
pasteurized 
at 

Unpas- 
teurized 

Pasteur- 
ized 

- 

160 

1 

.57 

28.0 

None 

44°F. 

47 

to 

10 

Curdled 

0.15 

0.3 

170 

165 

2 

.54      28.0 

5 

44 

47 

to 

8 

Curdled 

0.10 

0.6 

170 

3* 

.64 

28.0 

5 

44 

48 

170 

12 

Curdled 

0.10 

0.5 

4^ 

.72      29.5 

4 

44 

48 

170 

8 

Curdled 

0.10 

0.6 

165 

5 

.63      35.0 

4 

44 

48 

to 

8 

Did  not 

0.10 

0.2 

175 

Curdle 

170 

6 

.69 

29.0 

5 

44 

48 

to 

10 

Curdled 

0.10 

0.4 

180 

•$! 

170 

7 

.70 

30.0 

4 

44 

48 

to 

12 

Curdled 

0.08 

0.7 

180 

170 

8 

.70 

32.0 

4 

44 

48 

to 

10 

Did  not 

0.08 

0.15 

180 

curdle 

170 

9 

.70 

32.0 

4 

44 

48 

to 

10 

Did  not 

0.10 

0.20 

180 

curdle 

170 

10 

.68 

30.0 

4 

44 

48 

to 

12 

Curdled 

0.05 

0.50 

180 

AMBOY,  ILLINOIS — JULY  23  TO  AUGUST  17,  1906 
Nineteen  vats  of  cream  were  used.     The  acidity  of  the  cream 
when  delivered  varied  from  0.50  to  0.62  percent  and  the  fat  from  30 
to  38  percent. 

The  cream  was  thoroly  mixed,  then  divided  into  two  parts.  These 
different  lots  of  cream  were  handled  the  same  except  that  one  was  pas- 
teurized to  a  temperature  of  160°  to  180°  F.,  and  corresponding  lots 
churned  unpasteurized. 

During  the  first  five  days,  5  to  13  percent  of  starter  was  added  to 
the  pasteurized  cream  and  none  to  the  unpasteurized.  For  the  other 
fourteen  days  5  to  20  percent  of  starter  was  added  to  both  the  pasteur- 
ized and  unpasteurized  cream.  From  each  churning  a  60-pound  tub 
of  butter  was  packed  and  stored  with  the  Monarch  Refrigerating 
Company,  Chicago. 


376 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


The  cream  used  in  this  experiment  was  of  better  quality  than  that 
used  the  previous  year,  altho  it  was  all  skimmed  on  the  farm. 

As  soon  as  each  lot  of  butter  arrived  in  Chicago,  it  was  scored  by 
J.  B.  Newman. 

TABLE  5.    SHOWING  DIFFERENCE  IN  QUALITY  OF  BUTTER  MADE  THE  SAME  DAY 


Pasteurized 

Unp  asteuri  zed 

Vat  No. 

Tub  No. 

Score 

Gain 

Tub  No. 

Score 

Gain 

11 

22 

93.75 

0.25 

21 

93.50 

12 

24               94.00 

Same 

23 

94.00 

Same 

13 

26 

94.50 

O.Sj 

25 

94.00 

14 

28 

93.50 

27 

94.00 

ois" 

15 

30 

93.75 

29 

94.50 

0.75 

16 

32 

93.50 

31 

94.00 

0.5 

17 

34 

94.00 

33 

94.75 

0.75 

18 

36 

92.00 

i!6     . 

35 

91.00 

19 

38 

92.00 

37 

95.00 

3!6 

20 

40 

92.00 

Same 

39 

92.00 

Same 

21 

42 

93.50 

1.0 

41 

92.50 

22 

•     43 

93.75 

1.25 

44 

92.50 

23 

46 

93.00 

45 

93.50 

6'.  s' 

24 

48 

92.75 

47 

93.75 

1.0 

25 

50 

93.50 

Same 

49 

93.50 

Same 

26 

52              89.50 

51 

93.00 

4.50 

27 

54              92.00 

53 

94.50 

2.5 

28 

56 

92.00 

55 

93.00 

1.5 

29 

58 

90.50 

0.5 

57 

90.00 

.... 

Average  .  . 

92.81 

93.31 

TABLE  6.    RESULT  OF  SCORING  BUTTER  SEPTEMBER  12  BY  NEWMAN  AND  CRAWFORD 


Pasteurized 


Vat  No. 

Tub  No. 

Newman 

Crawford 

Tub  No. 

Newman 

Crawford 

11 

22 

91.50 

89.00 

21 

91.50 

90.00 

12 

24 

93.00 

93.00 

23 

89.00 

90.00 

13 

26 

92.50 

92.50 

25 

93.00 

94.00 

14 

28 

91.50 

92.50 

27 

96.00 

93.00 

15 

30 

91.50 

94.00 

29 

90.50 

90.00 

16 

32 

93.00 

93.00 

31 

93.50 

92.50 

17 

34 

92.00 

91.00 

33 

94.50 

94.00 

18 

36 

91.50 

92.50 

35 

92.50 

93.00 

19 

38 

91.50 

90.00 

37 

92.00 

94.00 

20 

40 

91.50           93.00 

39 

96.50 

94.00 

21 

42 

93.00           93.00 

41 

93.00 

93.00 

22 

43 

93.00           93.00 

44 

90.00 

90.00 

23 

46 

91.00           92.00 

45 

90.00 

92.00 

24 

48 

95.00           93.50 

47 

93.00 

93.50 

25 

50 

92.50           92.00 

49 

93.50 

91.00 

26 

52 

89.50 

92.00 

51 

93.50 

94.00 

27 

54 

90.00 

91.00 

53 

92.00 

91.00 

28 

56 

89.00 

91.00 

55 

93.50 

92.00 

29 

58 

88.00 

89.00 

57 

91.50 

91.00 

Average  .  . 

91.65 

91.94 

92.62 

92.21 

Unpasteurized 


1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


377 


The  result  of  this  judging  gave  an  average  of  one-half  of  one 
point  in  favor  of  the  butter  made  from  the  unpasteurized  cream.  The 
butter  made  from  three  out  of  the  nineteen  vats  of  cream  scored  alike 
for  both  the  pasteurized  and  unpasteurized. 

The  butter  made  from  six  lots  of  the  pasteurized  cream  scored 
from  one-fourth  to  one  and  one-fourth  points  higher,  while  the  butter 
made  from  the  unpasteurized  cream  in  the  other  ten  lots  scored  from 
one-half  to  three  points  higher  than  that  made  from  the  pasteurized 
cream. 

September  12,  or  26  days  after  the  last  lot  of  butter  was  made, 
it  was  again  scored  by  Newman  and  Crawford  with  the  results  as 
shown  in  Table  6. 

According  to  the  score  placed  by  Newman,  the  average  for  the 
butter  made  from  the  pasteurized  cream  was  91.65  and  unpasteurized 
92.62,  an  average  of  0.97  of  a  point  higher  for  the  unpasteurized 
butter. 

From  two  vats  of  cream  the  butter  scored  the  same  for  both  pas- 
teurized and  unpasteurized.  From  five  of  the  vats  one  to  four  points 
higher  for  the  pasteurized,  while  from  the  other  twelve  vats  the  butter 
made  from  unpasteurized  cream  scored  higher  by  one-half  to  four  and 
one-half  points. 

According  to  the  score  by  Crawford  the  average  for  the  pasteur- 
ized was  91.94  and  the  unpasteurized  92.21,  an  average  of  0.27  of  one 
point  higher  for  the  unpasteurized  butter. 

TABLE  7.    RESULT  OF  SCORING  BUTTER  DECEMBER  22,  BY  NEWMAN 
CRAWFORD  AND  MITTELSTADT 


Pasteurized 

Unpasteurized 

Vat 

Tub 

New- 

Craw- 

Mittel- 

Tub 

New- 

Craw- 

Mittel- 

No. 

No. 

man 

ford 

stadt 

No. 

man 

ford 

stadt 

11 

22 

91.00 

91.00 

91.00 

21 

89.00 

90.00 

89.00 

12 

24 

91.50 

92.00 

91.00 

23 

92.00 

90.00 

90.00 

13 

26 

91.00 

92.00 

92.00 

25 

92.00 

93.00 

93.00 

14 

28 

90.00 

.   88.00 

88.00 

27 

91.00 

93.00 

93.00 

15 

30 

88.00 

90.00 

90.00 

29 

91.00 

93.00 

93.50 

16 

32 

91.50 

90.50 

90.50 

31 

92.00 

92.00 

92.00 

17 

34 

89.00 

91.00 

92.00 

33 

90.00 

90.00 

91.00 

18 

36 

90.00 

91.00 

91.00 

35 

91.50 

93.00 

93.00 

19 

38 

90.00 

92.00 

91.00 

37 

89.00 

92.00 

91.50 

20 

40 

90.00 

90.00 

89.00 

39 

91.00 

92.00 

92.00 

21 

42 

90.00 

91.50 

91.00 

41 

92.00 

92.50 

93.00 

22 

43 

90.00 

91.00 

92.00 

44 

89.00 

89.00 

89.00 

23 

46 

90.00 

90.00 

90.00 

45 

89.00 

91.00 

91.00 

24 

48 

89.00 

91.00 

91.00 

47 

88.00 

90.00 

90.00 

25 

50 

85.00 

90.00 

90.00 

49 

91.00 

91.00 

92.00 

26 

52 

91.00 

89.00 

89.00 

51 

91.50 

90.00 

90.00 

27 

54 

90.00 

88.00 

88.00 

53 

92.50 

92.00 

92.00 

28 

56 

90.00 

90.00 

90.00 

55 

93.00 

92.00 

92.00 

29 

58 

86.00 

89.00 

88.00 

57 

87.00 

90.00 

90.00 

Average  .... 

89.68 

90.36 

90.23 

90.65 

91.34 

91.42 

Gain  

0.97 

0.98 

1.19 

378 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


From  four  vats  of  cream  the  butter  scored  the  same  for  both 
pasteurized  and  unpasteurized.  From  five  vats  one-half  to  four  points 
in  favor  of  the  pasteurized  cream,  while  the  butter  made  from  the 
other  ten  vats  scored  from  one-half  to  four  points  higher  for  the 
unpasteurized. 

December  22  the  butter  was  scored  the  third  time  by  Messrs.  New- 
man, Crawford  and  Mittelstadt  with  the  results  as  shown  in  Table  7. 

According  to  the  scores  made  by  Newman,  from  one  vat  the  pas- 
teurized and  unpasteurized  butter  scored  the  same.  From  five  of  the 
vats  the  butter  from  the  pasteurized  cream  scored  higher  by  one  to  two 
points,  while  from  the  other  comparisons  the  butter  made  from  the 
unpasteurized  cream  scored  higher  by  one-half  to  three  points. 

According  to  Crawford,  from  five  vats  the  butter  made  from  the 
pasteurized  cream  scored  higher  by  one  to  two  points,  while  from 
thirteen  of  the  vats  that  made  from  the  unpasteurized  cream  scored 
higher  by  one  to  five  points. 

According  to  Mittelstadt,  in  five  of  the  comparisons,  the  butter 
made  from  the  pasteurized  cream  scored  higher  by  one  to  three  points, 
while  in  the  other  fourteen  comparisons  that  made  from  the  unpas- 
teurized cream  scored  higher  by  one-half  to  four  points. 

TABLE  8.    DIFFERENCE  IN  QUALITY  ON  SAME  TUB  OF  BUTTER  BETWEEN 
SEPTEMBER  12  AND  DECEMBER  22 


Pasteurized 

Unpasteurized 

Gain 

Loss 

Gain 

Loss 

Vat 

New- 

Craw- 

New- 

v Craw- 

New- 

Craw- 

New- 

Craw- 

No. 

man 

ford 

man 

ford 

man 

ford 

man 

ford 

11 

2. 

0.5 

^  ^ 

2.5 

Same 

12 

1.5 

i.6 

3  0 

Same 

13 

1.5 

0.5 

i!6 

1.0 

14 

1.5 

4.5 

5.0 

Same 

15 

3.5 

4.0 

6  5 

3  6 

16 

1.5 

2.5 

i'.s 

6'.  5 

17 

3.0 

Same 

4.5 

4.0 

18 

1.5 

1.5 

1.0 

Same 

19 

i'.Q 

1.5 

. 

3.0 

2.0 

20 

1.5 

3.0 

5.5 

2.0 

21 

3.0 

1.5 

1.0 

0.5 

22 

3.0 

2.0 

1.0 

1.0 

23 

1.0 

2.0 

1.0 

1.0 

24 

6.0 

2.5 

5.0 

3.5 

25 

7.5 

2.0 

2.5 

Same 

26 

1.5 

3.0 

2. 

4.0 

27 

Same 

3.0 

6  5 

i  6 

28 

i  6 

1.0 

O.S 

Same 

29 

2!6 

Same 

4.5 

1.0 

In  Table  8  the  scores  according  to  Newman  show  that  one  tub  of 
pasteurized  butter  received  the  same  score  September  12  and  Decem- 
ber 22,  one  tub  scored  one  point  higher,  while  the  other  17  tubs  de- 


1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


379 


creased  0.5  to  7.5  points.  Three  tubs  of  unpasteurized  scored  higher 
by  0.5  to  3.0  points,  while  the  other  sixteen  tubs  decreased  in  quality 
during  storage  from  0.5  to  5  points. 

According  to  Crawford  two  tubs  of  pasteurized  scored  the  same 
September  12  and  December  22,  two  tubs  scored  2.0  points  higher, 
while  the  other  15  decreased  from  0.5  to  4.0  points.  Six  tubs  of  un- 
pasteurized butter  scored  the  same  at  both  times,  two  tubs  scored  1.0 
and  3.0  points  higher,  while  the  other  13  tubs  scored  lower  December 
22  by  0.5  to  4.0  points. 

TABLE  9.    CHURNING  DATA  1906  EXPERIMENTAL  BUTTER 


Loss  in  buttermilk 

*  T       . 

Pounds 

Av'ge 

Acidity 

Temper- 

Hours 

DATB 

Vat 

cream 

fat 

of  cream 

ature 

held 

No. 

received 

percent 

percent 

churned 

cold 

Pasteurized 

Unpasteur- 
ized 

July       23 

11 

2000 

38 

0.56 

52 

8 

July       24 
July       25 

12 
13 

1231 
1541 

34 
38 

0.50 
0.52 

52 
52 

9 
11 

6.30 

0.25 

July       26 

14 

1200 

34 

0.54 

54 

9 

0.10 

0.15 

July       27 

15 

1784 

38 

0.52 

54 

9 

0.25 

0.25 

July        30 

16 

2004 

36 

0.58 

54 

9 

0.15 

July       31 

17 

1308 

33 

0.56 

51 

9 

6  '.30 

0.25 

August    1 

18 

1700 

33 

0.50 

50 

9 

0.20 

0.17 

August    2 

19 

886 

32 

0.60 

52 

9 

August    3 

20 

1561 

34 

0.62 

53 

9 

o.io 

o.io 

August    6 

21 

2156 

34 

0.60 

53 

9 

0.05 

0.10 

August    7 

22 

1443 

31 

0.56 

50 

9 

0.10 

0.08 

August    8 

23 

1836 

32 

0.60 

50 

9 

0.15 

0.10 

August    9 

24 

889 

37 

0.56 

50 

9 

-0.15 

0.10 

August  10 

25 

1691 

37 

0.54 

50 

9 

0.15 

0.10 

August  13 

26 

2097 

35 

0.52 

52 

9 

0.07 

0.10 

August  14 

27 

1209 

30 

0.54 

50 

9 

0.15 

0.10 

August  15 

28 

1716 

34 

0.50 

51 

11 

0.10 

August  16 

29 

986 

33 

SO.  57 

51 

9 

0.08 

0.10 

August  17 

30 

1149 

35 

:-0.54 

52 

9 

One-half  of  the  above  cream  for  each  day  was  pasteurized  to  a 
temperature  of  180°  and  no  curdling  took  place. 

1907 

The  experimental  work  for  this  season  was  carried  on  at  the 
University  creamery.  All  of  the  cream  delivered  from  June  2  to  July 
15  was  used  with  the  exception  of  a  small  quantity  delivered  June  8. 
The  total  number  of  pounds  of  butter  made  was  7,796. 

The  work  on  pasteurization  was  continued.  The  butter  made 
from  cream  held  one  to  three  hours  after  it  was  cooled  to  churning 
temperature,  was  also  compared  with  the  butter  made  from  the  same 
cream  held  12  to  15  hours.  In  all,  16  vats  of  cream  were  used.  All 
of  the  cream  in  the  first  and  second  vats  was  pasteurized  and  cooled ; 
half  of  each  vat  was  churned  two  hours  later  and  the  remainder 
churned  the  following  morning.  One  30-pound  tub  of  butter  was 


380  BULLETIN  No.  138  [September, 

packed  from  each  churning  and  marked  (1)  and  (2)  for  vat  1,  and 
(3)  and  (4)  for  vat  2.  These  tubs  were  not  used  in  the  comparison 
of  pasteurized  and  unpasteurized  butter. 

One  half  of  the  cream  in  vats  8  and  11  was  pasteurized,  cooled, 
and  churned  two  hours  later.  The  other  half,  in  vats  8  and  11,  was 
handled  in  the  same  manner  but  was  not  pasteurized.  Two  tubs  of 
butter  were  packed  from  each  churning;  giving  the  tubs  marked  45 
and  46  unpasteurized,  47  and  48  pasteurized  from  vat  8;  tubs  65  and 
66  unpasteurized  and  67  and  68  pasteurized  butter  from  vat  11. 

One  half  of  the  cream  from  each  of  12  vats  was  pasteurized  and 
at  once  cooled  to  churning  temperature.  After  two  to  three  hours  one- 
half  of  this  cream  was  churned.  The  other. portion  was  churned  12 
to  15  hours  later.  The  remaining  half  of  the  12  vats  of  cream  was 
handled  in  the  same  manner,  except  that  it  was  not  pasteurized.  Two 
tubs  of  butter  were  packed  from  each  churning,  giving  us  24  tubs  of 
butter  made  from  the  cream  that  was  pasteurized  and  churned  in  the 
afternoon,  and  24  from  the  pasteurized  cream  churned  the  following 
morning.  A  corresponding  number  of  tubs  of  butter  were  made  at 
the  same  time  from  unpasteurized  cream,  making  a  total  of  108  tubs 
packed  for  scoring.  Fifty-two  tubs  of  butter  made  from  the  pasteur- 
ized cream  were  compared  with  fifty-two  tubs  of  butter  made  from 
unpasteurized  cream.  Twenty-six  tubs  of  pasteurized  butter  and 
twenty-four  tubs  of  unpasteurized  butter  churned  in  the  afternoon 
were  compared  with  a  similar  number  of  tubs  made  from  the  same 
cream  held  a  longer  period.  The  butter  was  stored  with  the  Monarch 
Refrigerating  Company,  Chicago. 

The  acidity  of  the  cream  before  it  was  divided  for  pasteurization 
varied  from  0.45  to  0.58  percent  and  the  fat  from  29  to  37  percent. 
The  percent  of  starter  added  to  the  cream  varied  from  15  to  66  per- 
cent, but  the  amount  used  for  the  same  day  was  identical  in  both  the 
pasteurized  and  unpasteurized  cream. 

All  the  tubs  of  butter  were  shipped  out  in  order  as  follows : 

June  11,  12  tubs;  Tune  18,  16  tubs;  June  25,  20  tubs;  July  2,  16 
tubs ;  July  9,  20  tubs ;  July  16,  16  tubs,  and  July  18,  8  tubs. 

Each  shipment  was  scored  by  the  writer  the  day  it  was  shipped 
and  the  following  day  it  was  scored  in  Chicago  by  J.  B.  Newman. 
According  to  this  scoring  the  average  for  the  pasteurized  butter  by 
Newman  was  92.23,  Lee  92.73,  and  unpasteurized  butter  by  Newman 
92.14  and  Lee  92.56. 


1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  AVFACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


381 


TABLE  10.    SCORES  BY  CARL  E.  LF.F.  BEFORE  SHIPPING,  AND  BY  J.  B.  NEWMAN, 

ONE  DAY  LATER 


Unpasteurized 

Pasteurized 

Date  when 
churned 

Vat 
No. 

Churn 
No. 

Tub 

No. 

Newman 

Lee 

Newman 

Lee 

6/3    p.  m. 
6/4    p.  m. 
6/4    a.  m. 
6/5    a.  m. 

1 
2 

1 
2 
3 

4 

1 
2 
3 
4 

91. 
88. 
92.5 
94. 

94. 
93. 
93.5 
94. 

6/7    p.  m. 
6/7    p.  m. 
6/8    a.  m. 
6/8    a.  m. 

3 

5 
6 
7 
8 

5 
6 
7 
8 
9 
10 
11 
12 

93.5 
93. 

93. 
92.5 

93.5 
93.5 

93.5 
93.5 

91. 
92. 

89. 
92. 

94. 
94. 

93. 
93. 

6/11  p.m. 
6/11  p.  m. 
6/12  a.  m. 
6/12  a.  m. 

4 

9 
10 
11 
12 

13 
14 
15 
16 
17 
18 
19 
20 

94. 
94. 

93. 
93.5 

92.5 
92.5 

93. 
93. 

92. 
94. 

93. 
92. 

93. 
93. 

92.5 
92.5 

6/14  p.  m. 
6/14  p.  m. 
6/15  a.  m. 
6/15  a.  m. 

5 

13 

14 
15 
16 

21 
22 
23 
24 
25 
26 
27 
28 

94.5 
94.5 

93. 
88. 

92. 
92. 

92. 
92. 

93. 
92. 

95. 
92. 

93. 
93. 

92. 
92. 

6/18  p.  m. 
6/18  p.  m. 
6/19  a.  m. 
6/19  a.  m. 

6 

17 
18 
19 
20 

29 
30 
31 
32 
33 
34 
35 
36 

92. 
89. 

92. 
93.5 

93. 
93. 

93. 
93. 

89. 
88. 

89. 
94.5 

92. 
92. 

92.5 
92.5 

6/21  p.  m. 
6/21  p.  m. 
6/22  a.  m. 
6/22  a.  m. 

7 

21 
.22 
23 
24 

37 
38 
39 
40 
41 
42 
43 
44 

93.5 
94. 

94.5 
95. 

93.5 
93.5 

93. 
93. 

92. 
93. 

93. 
89. 

93.5 
93.5 

94. 
94. 

382 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


TABLE  10— Continued 


Date  when 

Vat 

Churn 

Tub 

Unpasteurized 

Pasteurized 

churned 

No. 

No. 

No. 

Newman 

Lee 

Newman 

Lee 

6/24  p.  m. 

25 

45 

92. 

88. 

8 

46 

93. 

88. 

6/24  p.  m. 

26 

47 

93. 

88. 

48 

93. 

88. 

6/25  p.  m. 

27 

49 

88. 

93. 

50 

87. 

93. 

6/25  p.  m. 

28 

51 

91. 

93.5 

52 

92.5 

93.5 

6/26  a.  m. 

9 

29 

53 

89. 

93. 

54 

86. 

93. 

6/26  JL.  m. 

30 

55 

91.5 

93. 

56 

91. 

93. 

6/28  p.  m. 

31 

57 

91. 

93. 

56 

94. 

93. 

6/28  p.  m. 

32 

59 

95. 

93. 

60 

93. 

93. 

6/29  a.  m. 

10 

33 

61 

94.5 

93. 

62 

93.5 

93. 

6/29  a.  m. 

34 

63 

93. 

93. 

64 

94. 

93. 

6/21  p.  m. 

X 

35 

65 

91. 

92. 

11 

66 

93.5 

92. 

6/21  p.  m. 

36 

67 

90. 

91. 

68 

90. 

91. 

7/2  p.  m. 

37 

69 

93. 

93. 

70 

93. 

93. 

7/2  p.  m. 

38 

71 

86.5 

93.5 

72 

89. 

93.5 

7/3  a.  m. 

12 

39 

73 

92. 

93. 

74 

90. 

93. 

7/3  a.  m. 

49 

75 

93. 

91. 

76 

89. 

91. 

7/5  p.  m. 

41 

77 

91. 

92. 

78 

91. 

92. 

7/5  p.m. 

42 

79 

89. 

91. 

80 

93.5 

91. 

7/6  a.  m. 

13 

43 

81 

88. 

92.5 

82 

93. 

92.5 

7/6  a/m. 

44 

83 

93. 

91. 

84 

91.5 

91. 

7/9  p.  m. 

45 

85 

93. 

93. 

86 

92. 

93. 

7/9  ;p.  m. 

46 

87 

95. 

92.5 

88 

94. 

92.5 

7/10  a.  m. 

14 

47 

89 

89. 

93. 

90 

94. 

93. 

7/10  a.  m. 

48 

91 

95. 

93. 

92 

95. 

93. 

1909]  PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 

TABLE  10 — Continued 


383 


Unpasteurized 

Pasteurized 

Date  when 
churned 

Vat 
No. 

Churn 
No. 

Tub 

No. 

Newman 

Lee 

Newman 

Lee 

7/12  p.  m. 

49 

93 

95. 

93. 

94 

91.5 

93. 

7/12  p.  m. 

50 

95 

95. 

93. 

96 

94.5 

93. 

7/13  a.  m. 

15 

51 

97 

91. 

93. 

98 

95. 

93. 

7/13  a.  m. 

52 

99 

93.5 

93. 

100 

94.5 

93. 

7/15  p.  m. 

53 

101 

93. 

94. 

102 

94.5 

94. 

7/15  p.  m. 

54 

103 

94.5 

94. 

104 

93.5 

94. 

7/16  a.  m. 

16 

55 

105 

95.5 

93.5 

106 

94. 

93.5 

7/16  a.  m. 

56 

107 

92. 

93.5 

108 

89. 

93.5 

Average.  .  . 

92.33 

92.73 

92.14 

92.56 

The  108  tubs  were  placed  in  storage  and  re-scored  July  25  by  G. 
L.  McKay,  John  Crawford,  John  Mittelstadt,  J.  B.  Newman  and  J.  H. 
Credicott.  Each  judge  worked  independently  and  without  any  knowl- 
edge of  the  nature  of  the  experiment. 


384 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


TABLE  11.    RESULT  OF  SCORING  THE  108  TUBS  or  BUTTER  JULY  25,  1907 


Unpasteurized 

Pasteurized 

Judges 

Judges 

Tub 

Mc- 

New- 

Craw- 

Mittel- 

Credi- 

Mc- 

New- 

Craw- 

Mittel- 

Credi- 

No. 

Kay 

man 

ford 

stadt 

cott 

Kay" 

man 

ford 

stadt 

cott 

1 

92.50 

94.00 

93.00 

92.00 

92.00 

2 

93.50 

91.00 

90.00 

92.00 

91.00 

3 

92.00 

93.00 

93.00 

94.50 

88.00 

4 

92.75 

94.00 

92.00 

93.50 

89.00 

5 

93.25 

94.50 

92.00 

93.50 

92.00 

6 

92.75 

95.00 

92.00 

95.00 

95.00 

7 

94.00 

93.00 

93.00 

95.00 

88.00 

8 

93.75 

93.00 

93.00 

94.00 

93.00 

9 

92.50 

94.50 

94.00 

94.50 

89.00 

10 

92.75 

94.00 

93.00 

94.00 

93.00 

11 

93.50 

93.00 

93.00 

91.00 

91.00 

12 

93.25 

94.50 

90.00 

94.00 

92.50 

13 

94.50 

93.00 

94.00 

93.00 

92.00 

14 

93.00 

93.50 

94.00 

93.50 

90.00 

15 

93.00 

95.00 

93.00 

94.00 

91.00 

16 

93.25 

94.00 

93.00 

94.00 

91.00 

17 

93.25 

95.00 

93.00 

93.00 

89.00 

18 

93.00 

92.00 

92.00 

92.00 

91.00 

19 

93.50 

94.00 

92.00 

93.50 

92.50 

20 

93.00 

95.00 

93.00 

94.00 

92.50 

21 

93.25 

95.00 

94.00 

93.50 

90.00 

22 

93.25 

94.50 

92.00 

93.50 

93.50 

23 

93.00 

91.50 

91.00 

93.00 

89.00 

24 

92.00 

94.00 

92.00 

93.50 

92.00 

25 

93.00 

95.00 

93.00 

92.50 

90.00 

26 

93.75 

94.50 

94.00 

93.00 

89.00 

27 

94.00  . 

93.50 

91.00 

94.00 

90.00 

28 

94.00 

93.00 

93.00 

93.00 

93.00 

29 

93.25 

94.00 

95.00 

95.00 

93.00 

30 

93.25 

95.00 

95.00 

94.50 

93.00 

31 

92.75 

93.00 

94.00 

92.50 

93.50 

32 

93.00 

92.50 

94.00 

93.00 

92.00 

33 

93.00 

94.00 

94.00 

94.00 

93.00 

34 

92,50 

03.50 

94.00 

93.00 

93.00 

35 

92.75 

93.00 

94.00 

92.50 

93.50 

36 

92.50 

9-3.50 

94.00 

93.00 

92.00 

37 

92.75 

95.00 

95.00 

94.50 

91.50 

38 

93.25 

93.00 

95.00 

94.50 

93.50 

39 

93.50 

94.00 

94.00 

93.50 

93.00 

40 

93.00 

94.50 

95.00 

92.00 

93.00 

41 

93.50 

95.00 

94.00 

94.50 

93.00 

42 

93.00 

94.50 

94.00 

93.50 

92.50 

43 

93.00 

95.00 

94.00 

94.00 

89.00 

44 

93.00 

94.50 

94.00 

94.00 

94.00 

45 

91.50 

93.00 

95.00 

93.50 

88.00 

46 

92.00 

93.00 

95.00 

93.00 

88.00 

47 

92.00 

94.00 

92.00 

88.00 

48 

I 

92.50 

94.00 

94.00 

93.00 

88.00 

1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


385 


TABLE  11 — Continued 


Unpasteurized 

Pasteurized 

Judges 

Judges 

Tub 
No. 

Mc- 
Kay 

New- 
man 

Craw- 
ford 

Mittel- 
stadt 

Credi- 
cott 

Mc- 
Kay 

New- 
man 

Craw- 
ford 

Mittel- 
stadt 

Credi- 
cott 

49 
50 
51 
52 
53 
54 
55 
56 

92.50 
91.50 

92.50 
92.50 

89.00 
91.00 

93.00 
92.00 

93.00 
91.00 

94.00 
91.00 

91.50 
93.50 

93.00 
92.00 

87.00 
87.00 

86.00 
93.00 

92.50 
92.75 

92.75 
93.00 

90.00 
92.00 

94.00 
94.50 

93.00 
93.00 

93.00 
92.00 

92.50 
94.00 

92.00 
94.50 

87.00 
89.00 

87.00 
92.50 

57 
58 
59 
60 
61 
62 
63 
64 

92.50 
92.50 

9, 

92.50 
93.  -00 

94.00 
94.50 

94.75 
93  .  50 

93.00 
92.00 

92.00 
93.00 

93.00 
93.00 

94.00 
93.00 

93.00 
92.00 

91.00 

93.00 
94.50 

93.00 
93.50 

94.00 
94.50 

94.50 
93.50 

91.00 
92.00 

94.00 
90.00 

94.00 
94.00 

93.00 
93.50 

93.00 
92.50 

88.00 
90.00 

65 
66 
67 
68 

92.00 
92.75 

95.00 
94.00 

92.00 
92.00 

94.00 
93.00 

93.00 
93.00 

93.00 
93.75 

93.50 
91.50 

94.00 
94.00 

93.00 
94.50 

92.50 
92.50 

69 
70 
71 
72 
73 
74 
75 
76 

92.75 
93.00 

93.00 
92.50 

94.00 
94".  50 

94.00 
93.50 

91.00 
93.00 

94.00 
93.00 

94.00 
93.50 

93.50 
93.50 

93.00 
91.00 

92.50 
90.00 

93.00 
92.75. 

93.00 
92.50 

90.00 
89.00 

92.50 
92.50 

92.00 
91.00 

93.00 
93.00 

94.00 
94.50 

93.00 
92.00 

90.00 
89.00 

90.00 
90.00 

77 
78 
79 
80 
81 
82 
83 
84 

92.75 
92.50 

91.75 
93.75 

94.50 
93.50 

94.50 
94.50 

94.00 
93.00 

93.00 
93.00 

94.00 
94.00 

94.50 
94.50 

90.00 
92.00 

90.00 
92.00 

92.75 
93.00 

93.00 
93.50 

94.00 
93.00 

94.00 
94.50 

94.00 
93.00 

94.00 
94.00 

94.00 
93.00 

92.50 
92.50 

92.00 
89.00 

91.50 
91.00 

85 
86 
87 
88 
89 
90 
91 
92 

92.50 
93.00 

92.00 
92.75 

93.50 
94.00 

92.50 
93.00 

91.00 
92.00 

94.00 
91.00 

93.50 
94.00 

93.50 
93.00 

86.00 
89.00 

88.00 
89.00 

92.50 
93.25 

93.00 
93.50 

93.50 
94.50 

91.50 
91.00 

93.00 
91.00 

93.00 
94.00 

94.50 
94.50 

94.50 
94.00 

90.00 
90.00 

89.00 
89.00 

386 


BULLETIN  No.  138 
TABLE  11 — Continued 


[September, 


Unpasteurized 

Pasteurized 

Judges 

Judges 

Tub 

Mc- 

New- 

Craw- 

Mittel- 

Credi- 

Mc- 

New- 

Craw- 

Mittel- 

Credi- 

No. 

Kay 

man 

ford 

stadt 

cott 

Kay 

man 

ford 

stadt 

cott 

93 

92.75 

94.00 

93.00 

93.50 

89.00 

94 

92.75 

94.50 

93.00 

94.00 

92.00 

95 

92.75 

95.00 

94.00 

93.00 

93.00 

96 

93.25 

93.00 

92.00 

93.00 

93.00 

97 

92.75 

95.00 

93.00 

94.00 

89.00 

98 

93.50 

95.50 

94.00 

94.00 

90.00 

99 

93.00 

95.50 

94.00 

95.00 

92.00 

100 

92.75 

95.00 

94.00 

94.50 

90.00 

101 

92.50 

94.50 

94.00 

94.00 

88.00 

102 

92.75 

94.50 

93.00 

94.00 

89.00 

103 

92.75 

93.00 

93.00 

94.50 

93.00 

104 

92.75 

93.50 

92.00 

94.00 

92.00 

105 

93.00 

94.50 

94.00 

94.00 

87.00 

106 

92.00 

94.00 

93.00 

93.50 

88.00 

107 

92.75 

94.00 

92.00 

93.00 

93.50 

108 

93.50 

94.00 

91.00 

94.50 

91.00 

Av. 

92.78 

93.91 

93.17 

93.60 

90.61 

93.08 

93.35 

92.90 

93.50 

91.02 

Gain 

0.56 

0.27 

0.10 

0.30 

0.41 

1909] 
TABLE 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


387 


12.    AVERAGE,  HIGHEST  AND  LOWEST,  OF  THE  EIGHT  DIFRERENT  SCORES  ON 
THE  SAME  BUTTER  JULY  25,  1907* 


Unpasteurized 

Pasteurized 

Tub 

No. 

Av. 

Highest 

Lowest 

Tub 

No. 

?Av. 

Highest 

Lowest 

p.m. 
a.m. 

5,  6 
9,  10 

93.50 
93.66 

95.       N.M. 
94.5  N.M. 

92.     C. 
92.5  Me. 

7,  8 
11,  12 

93.59 
92.78 

95.    M. 
94.5  N. 

93.     N.C. 
90.     C. 

p.m. 

a  m. 

13,  14 
17,  18 

93.56 
92.91 

94.5  Me. 

95.     N. 

93.  McN.M 
92.  N.C.M. 

15,  16 
19,  20 

93.66 
93.5 

95  .   .  N. 

95.  '  N. 

93.     Mc.C. 
92.     C. 

p.m. 
a  m. 

21,  22 

25,  26 

93.62 
93.59 

95.     N. 
95.     N. 

92.     C. 

92.5  M. 

23,  24 
27,  28 

92.5 
93.2 

94.     N. 
94.     Me. 

91.     C. 
91.     C. 

p.m. 
a  m. 

29,  30 
33,  34 

94.37 
93.5 

95.   N.C.M. 
94.   N.C.M. 

93.25  Me. 
92.5     Me. 

31,  32 

35,  36 

93.09 
93.15 

94.     C. 
94.     C. 

92.5  N.M. 
92.5  Mc.M. 

p.m. 
a.  m. 

37,  38 
41,  42 

94.15 
94. 

95.     N.C. 
95.     N. 

92.75  Me. 
93  .      Me. 

39,  40 
43,  44 

93.69 
93.93 

95.     C. 

95.     N. 

92.     M. 
93.     Me. 

p.m. 

45,  46 

93.25 

95.     C. 

91.5  Me. 

47,  48 

93.07 

94.     N.C. 

92.     N.M. 

p.m. 
a  m. 

49,  50 
53,  54 

91.62 
92.5 

93.5  M. 
94.     C. 

89.     N. 
91.     C. 

51,  52 

55,  56 

92.47 
93.22 

94.     M. 

94.5  N.M. 

90.     N. 
92.5  C.M. 

p.m. 
a  m. 

57,  58 
61,  62 

93.06 
93.22 

94.5  N. 
94.75  N. 

92.     C. 
92.     C. 

59,  60 
63,  64 

93.37 
93.19 

94.5  Mc.N 
94.5  N. 

91.     C. 
90.     C. 

p.m 

65,  66 

93.09 

95.     N. 

92.     Mc.C. 

67,  68 

93.41 

94.5  M. 

89.     N. 

p.m 
a  m 

69,  70 
73,  74 

93.22 
93.37 

94.5  N. 
94.     N.C. 

91.     C. 
92.5  Me. 

71,  72 

75,  76 

92.03 
92.69 

94.5  M. 
93  .  McC.M 

91.5  N. 
92.     M. 

p.m 
a  m 

77,  78 
81,  82 

93.53 
93.69 

94.5  N.M. 
94.5  N.M. 

92.5     Me. 
91.75  Me. 

79,  80 
83,  84 

93.34 
93  .V5 

94.   N.C.M 
94.5  N. 

92.75  Me. 
92.5  M. 

p.m 
a  m 

85,  86 
89,  90 

92.94 
92.72 

94.     N.M. 
94.     C. 

91.     C. 
91.     C. 

87,  88 
J91,  92 

93.34 
93.06 

94.5  N.M. 
94.5  M.j 

91.     C. 

91.     N. 

p.m 
am 

93,  94 
97,  98 

93.44 
93.87 

94.5  N. 
95.  SIN. 

92.75  Me. 
',92.75  Me. 

95,  96 
99,  100 

93.25 
294.22 

95.     N. 
95.5^N. 

92.     C. 
92.75  Me. 

p.m 

a  m 

101,  10 
105,  10 

93.66 
93.5 

94.5  N.           92.5  Me. 
94.5  N.           92.     Me. 

103,  10 
107,  10 

93.19 
93.09 

94.5  M. 

94.5  M. 

92  .     C. 
91.     C. 

Average   .   . 

93.37 

94.76               92.03 

93.22 

94.46 

91.65 

*Scores  by  Credicott  omitted 

From  the  foregoing  table  the  average  of  the  208  scores  on  52  tubs 
from  26  churnings  of  unpasteurized  cream  was  93.37,  and  93.22  for 
the  butter  from  the  pasteurized  cream.  The  average  of  all  the  highest 
individual  scores  for  each  day  was  94.76  for  the  unpasteurized  and 
94.46  for  the  pasteurized,  and  the  average  of  all  the  lowest  scores  for 
each  day  was  92.03  for  the  unpasteurized  and  91.65  for  the  pasteurized. 


388  BULLETIN  No.  138  (September, 

The  butter  receiving  the  highest  average  score  94.37  was  packed 
in  tubs  29  and  30  (unpasteurized).  The  butter  churned  from  the  same 
cream  fifteen  hours  later  received  an  average  score  of  93.50.  Butter 
made  from  the  same  cream  pasteurized,  received  for  the  afternoon 
churning  an  average  score  of  93.09  and  the  butter  made  fifteen  hours 
later  a  score  of  93.15.  The  highest  score,  95.50,  was  recorded  on  tubs 

98  and  99.  !  These  tubs  of  butter  were  made  the  same  day,  one  repre- 
senting the  unpasteurized  and  the  other  the  pasteurized  butter.     The 
highest  score  on  tub.  97,  which  was  from  the  same  churning  as  tub  98, 
was  95.    The  average  for  all  scores  on  tubs  97  and  98  was  93.87.   Tub 
100  was  also  scored  95,  with  an  average  for  all  scores  on  tubs  99  and 
100  of  94.22.     This  gives  0.35  of  a  point  in  favor  of  the  pasteurized 
butter.     The  butter  in  tubs  93  and  94  was  churned  from  the  same 
cream  as  the  butter  in  tubs  97  and  98,  the  only  difference  the  length 
of -time  the  cream  was  held  cold  before  churning.     The  same  thing  is 
true  of  the  butter  in  tubs  95  and  96  as  compared  with  butter  in  tubs 

99  and  100.    The  average  score  for  tubs  93  and  94  was  93.44  and  for 
tubs  95  and  96,  93.25,  or  0.19  of  a  point  in  favor  of  the  unpasteurized 
butter. 

The  butter  from  fifteen  out  of  the  twenty-six  churnings  of  un- 
pasteurized cream  received  a  higher  average  score  than  the  -butter 
made  from  the  pasteurized  cream. 

SUMMARY  OF  EACH  JUDGE'S  SCORING,  JULY.  25,  1907 

Result  of  McKay's  Scoring. — An  average  of  92.78  for  the  butter 
made  from  the  unpasteurized  cream  and  93.08  from  the  butter  made 
from  the  pasteurized  cream,  or  an  average  of  0  30  of  one  point  higher 
for  the  pasteurized  butter. 

The  butter  made  from  both  the  unpasteurized  and  pasteurized 
cream  for  two  days  scored  the  same.  The  butter  made  from  eighteen 
of  the  twenty-six  churnings  of  pasteurized  cream,  scored  from  one- 
eighth  to  one  point  higher  than  that  made  from  corresponding  churn- 
ings of  unpasteurized  cream ;  while  that  from  the  other  six  churnings 
of  unpasteurized  cream  scored  from  one-eighth  to  three-fourths  of  a 
point  higher  than  the  butter  made  from  the  six  churnings  of  pasteur- 
ized cream. 

The  duplicate  tubs  of  butter  made  from  the  unpasteurized  cream 
scored  the  same  from  five  different  churnings;  from  five  churnings 
the  score  on  duplicate  tubs  varied  one-fourth  of  a  point ;  from  eight 
churnings,  one-half  point;  from  four  churnings,  three-fourths  of  a 
point ;  from  two  churnings,  one  point ;  from  one  churning,  one  and 
one-half  points;  and  from  one  churning,  two  points. 

The  duplicate  tubs  of  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized  cream 
scored  the  same  from  three  churnings;  one  duplicate  tub  was  over- 
looked by  the  judge.  The  variation  in  score  on  duplicate  tubs  from 
the  other  22  churnings  was  as  follows : 

From  10  churnings  one-fourth  of  a  point;  7,  one-half;  3,  three- 
fourths;  1,  one  point,  and  1  churning  one  and  one-half  points. 

Result  of  Newman's  Scoring. — An  average  of  93.91  for  the  butter 


1909]  PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER  389 

made  from  the  unpasteurized  cream  and  93.35  for  the  butter  made 
from  the  pasteurized  cream,  or  an  average  of  0.56  of  a  point  in  favor 
of  the  unpasteurized.  The  butter  made  from  both  the  unpasteurized 
and  pasteurized  cream  scored  the  same  for  four  day's  churnings.  The 
butter  made  from  sixteen  of  the  twenty-six  churnings  of  unpasteur- 
ized cream  scored  from  one-eighth  to  four  and  three-fourths  points 
higher  than  the  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized  cream  on  corres- 
ponding days.  While  the  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized  cream  for 
the  other  six  days  scored  higher  than  the  butter  made  from  the  un- 
pasteurized by  one-fourth  to  one  and  three-fourth  points. 

The  duplicate  tubs  of  butter  made  from  the  unpasteurized  cream 
scored  the  same  from  three  churnings.  The  variation  in  score  on  du- 
plicate tubs  packed  from  the  other  twenty-three  churnings  was  as 
follows : 

From  15  churnings  one-half  of  a  point;  4,  one  point;  1,  one  and 
one-fourth;  2,  two  points,  and  1,  three  points. 

The  duplicate  tubs  of  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized  cream 
scored  the  same  from  three  churnings.  The  variation  in  score  on  du- 
plicate tubs  packed  from  the  other  23  churnings  was  as  follows : 

From  11  churnings  one-half  point;  6,  one  point;  1,  one  and  one- 
half;  4,  two  points,  and  1,  two  and  one-half  of  one  point. 

Result  of  Crawford's  Scoring. — An  average  of  93.17  for  the  but- 
ter made  from  the  unpasteurized  cream,  and  92.90  for  the  butter  made 
from  the  pasteurized  cream,  or  an  average  of  027  of  a  point  higher 
for  the  unpasteurized.  The  butter  made  from  both  the  unpasteurized 
and  pasteurized  cream  scored  the  same  for  six  out  of  the  twenty-six 
comparisons.  The  butter  made  from  thirteen  churnings  of  unpasteur- 
ized cream  scored  from  one-half  to  two  points  higher  than  the  butter 
made  from  the  corresponding  churnings  of  pasteurized  cream. 

From  the  seven  remaining  comparisons  the  butter  made  from  the 
pasteurized  cream  scored  higher  than  the  butter  made  from  the  unpas- 
teurized by  one-half  to  two  points. 

The  variation  in  score  on  tubs  of  butter  packed  from  the  same 
churn  was  as  follows : 

Unpasteurized  butter : 

From  10  churnings,  no  difference;  11,  one  point;  3,  two  points; 
and  2,  three  points. 

Pasteurized  butter : 

From  11  churnings,  no  difference;  10,  one  point;  3,  two  points; 
1,  three  points,  and  1  four  points. 

Result  of  Mittelstadt's  Scoring. — An  average  of  93.60  for  the 
butter  made  from  unpasteurized  cream  and  93.50  for  the  butter  made 
from  the  pasteurized  cream,  or  an  average  of  one-tenth  of  a  point 
higher  for  the  unpasteurized. 

The  butter  made  from  both  the  unpasteurized  and  pasteurized 
cream  scored  the  same  for  two  out  of  the  26  comparisons. 

The  butter  made  from  eleven  churnings  of  unpasteurized  cream 
scored  from  one-fourth  to  two  points  higher  than  the  butter  made 
from  corresponding  churnings  of  pasteurized  cream,  while  from  the 


390 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


other  thirteen  comparisons  the  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized  cream 
scored  higher  than  the  butter  from  the  unpasteurized  by  one  to  one 
and  one-fourth  points.  The  variation  in  score  on  duplicate  tubs 
of  butter  from  the  same  churning  was  as  follows : 

Unpasteurized  butter: 

From  8  churnings,  no  difference ;  10,  one-half  point ;  6,  one  point ; 
1,  one  and  one-half;  and  1,  two  points. 

Pasteurized  butter: 

From  6  churnings,  no  difference;  9,  one-half  point;  5,  one  point; 
4,  one  and  one-half;  1,  two  and  one-half;  and  1,  three  points. 

Result  of  Credicott's  Scoring. — An  average  of  90.61  for  the  but- 
ter made  from  the  unpasteurized  cream  and  91.02  for  the  butter  made 
from  the  pasteurized  cream,  or  an  average  of  0.41  of  a  point  in  favor 
of  the  pasteurized.  The  variation  in  score  on  duplicate  tubs  of  butter 
from  the  same  churning  was  as  follows : 

Unpasteurized  butter: 

From  5  churnings,  no  difference;  1,  one-half  point;  6,  one  point; 
6,  two  points;  1,  two  and  one-half;  3,  three  points;  1,  three  and  one- 
half;  1,  four  points;  1,  seven  points.  One  tub  overlooked. 

Pasteurized  butter : 

From  9  churnings,  no  variation;  2,  one-half  point;  2,  one  point; 
3,  one  and  one-half  points ;  3,  two  points ;  3,  three  points ;  2,  five 
points;  and  1,  a  variation  of  five  and  one-half  points. 

TABLE  13.    VARIATION      IN   SCORE  ON   DUPLICATE  TUBS  JULY  25,    1907 


Extent 
tion  .  .  . 

of    varia- 

0 

X 

^ 

y\ 

I, 

1W 

\V> 

2 

2  y> 

3 

3  V* 

4 

5 

S\4 

7 

Unpast. 

5 

5 

8 

4 

2 

1 

1 

Past. 

3 

10 

7 

3 

1 

1 

New- 

Unpast. 

3 

14 

4 

1 

2 

2 

man 

Past. 

3 

11 

6 

1 

4 

i 

Craw- 

Unpast. 

10 

11 

3 

•^ 

2 

ford 

Past. 

11 

10 

3 

1 

1 

Mittel- 

Unpast. 

8 

10 

6 

1 

1 

stadt 

Past. 

6 

9 

5 

4 

i 

1 

Credi- 

Unpast. 

5 

1 

6 

6 

i 

3 

1 

1 

1 

cott 

Past. 

9 

2 

2 

4 

3 

3 

2 

1 

After  the  scoring  of  July  25,  the  tubs  of  butter  were  again  placed 
in  storage  at  a  temperature  of  9°  to  12°  below  zero. 

December  27,  1907,  the  butter  was  re-scored  by  four  of  the  same 
judges  who  scored  July  25. 

For  this  scoring  the  number  on  the  top  of  the  tubs  was  changed, 
while  the  original  number  remained  on  the  bottom  for  identification, 
after  scoring. 


1909]  PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER  391 

TABLE  14.    RESULT  OF  SCORING  THE  108  TUBS  OF  BUTTER  DECEMBER  27,  1907 


Unpasteurized 

Pasteurized 

Tub 

No. 

McKay 

New- 
man 

Craw- 
ford 

Mittel- 
stadt 

Av. 
score 

McKay 

New- 
man 

Craw- 
ford 

Mittel- 
stadt 

Av. 
score 

1st  4 

1 

92.5 

92.5 

91.5 

91. 

not 

2 

No  unpasteurized  for  comparison 

92.5 

89. 

90.5 

89. 

used  in 

3 

92.5 

90. 

92. 

93. 

general 

4 

92.75 

89.5 

92.5 

91. 

average 

5 

91. 

92.5 

92. 

92. 

6 

92.5 

92. 

92.5 

94. 

92.31 

7 

93. 

92. 

91.5 

93. 

8 

92.75 

93. 

91. 

91.5 

92.17 

9 

93. 

92.5 

92.5 

94. 

10 

93.25 

92. 

92.5 

94. 

92.87 

11 

92.75 

91. 

91.5 

90.5 

12 

93.25 

91. 

91.5 

93.5 

91.87 

"13 

93.5 

91.5 

91.5 

92.5 

14 

92.5 

91.5 

92.5 

93. 

92.31 

15 

92.25 

93. 

92. 

90. 

16 

93. 

92.5 

92.5 

92. 

92.15 

17 

93.5 

90. 

92. 

93. 

18 

92.5 

90. 

91.5 

92. 

91.81 

19 

92.50 

92. 

92. 

93. 

20 

93.25 

92. 

92.5 

90. 

92.15 

21 

91.00 

91.00 

91.50 

93.00 

22 

92.50 

92.00 

91.00 

92.00 

91.75 

23 

92.75 

91.00 

91.50 

89.50 

24 

92.50 

91.00 

90.50 

91.50 

91.28 

25 

92.25 

93.00 

92.50 

91.00 

26 

92.75 

93.00 

91.50 

92.50 

92.31 

27 

92.50 

92.00 

91.00 

92.50 

28 

92.25 

92.00 

92.50 

91.50 

92.03 

29 

92.00 

91.00 

91.50 

93.50 

30 

92.00 

90.50 

92.00 

93.00 

91.93 

31 

92.25 

92.00 

92.00 

91.00 

32 

93.25 

92.50 

91.50 

91.00 

91.93 

33 

92.00 

92.00 

91.50 

93.00 

34 

91.00 

93.00 

91.50 

91.50 

91.93 

35 

93.00 

92.00 

9.1  .  00 

92.50 

36 

92.00 

92.00 

91.50 

93.00 

92.12 

37 

93.50 

91.00 

92.50 

94.00 

t 

38 

92.75 

91.00 

91.50 

93.50 

92.47 

39 

92.00 

92.00 

91.00 

93.00 

40 

93.00 

92.00 

91.50 

89.00 

91.68 

41 

92.50 

92.00 

92.50 

93.50 

42 

93.00 

90.00 

92.50 

93.50 

92.44 

43 

93.25 

93.50 

92.00 

93.00 

44 

93.00 

93.00 

91.00 

93.50 

92.78 

45 

92.00 

90.00 

92.00 

89.00 

46 

90.50 

90.00 

92.50 

90.50 

90.81 

47 

92.00 

90.00 

91.50 

89.00 

48 

91.00 

91.00 

91.00 

90.00 

90.68 

392 


BULLETIN  No.  138 
TABLE  14 — Continued 


[September, 


Unpasteurized 


Pasteurized 


Tub 

No.' 

McKay 

New- 
man 

Craw- 
ford 

Mittel- 
stadt 

Av. 

score 

McKay 

New- 
man 

Craw- 
ford 

Mittel- 
stadt 

Av. 
score 

49 

91.00 

90.00 

91.00 

90.00 

50 

90.00 

88.00 

89.50 

89.00 

89.81 

51 

92.25 

90.00 

91.50 

91.00 

52 

92.50 

89.00 

91.50 

90.00 

90.97 

53 

89.00 

88  .  00 

88.50 

93.00 

54 

89.00 

89.00 

91.00 

91.00 

89.81 

55 

92.00 

92.00 

91.00 

91.00 

56 

93.50 

93.00 

90.50 

92.50 

91.93 

57 

92.25 

93.00 

92.00 

91.00 

- 

58 

92.50 

93.50 

91.50 

89.00 

91.84 

59 

92.75 

89.00 

91.00 

90.00 

60 

93.00 

89.50 

90.50 

92.00 

90.47 

61 

92.75 

90.00 

92.00 

92.50 

62 

92.50 

91.00 

91.50 

93.00 

91.90 

' 

63 

92.75 

89.00 

91.50 

90.00 

64 

92.00 

90.00 

88.50 

93.00 

90.84 

65 

92.00 

92.00 

92.00 

93.50 

1 

66 

92.75 

92.00 

91.00 

93.00 

92.28 

67 

93.00 

89.00 

91.50      92.50 

68 

91.50 

89.50      92.00      94.00      91.62 

69 

92.00 

91.00 

91.00 

90.00 

70 

92.25 

90.00 

91.00 

92.00 

91.15 

71 

91.50 

90.00 

90.50 

92.50 

72 

92.50 

90.00 

91.00 

93.50 

91.44 

73 

92.50 

91.00 

91.50 

92.50 

74 

91.75 

90.00 

91.50 

93.00 

91.72 

75 

93.00 

89.00 

90.50 

89.00 

76 

92.50 

89.00 

91.00 

90.00 

90.50 

77 

90.50 

90.00 

89.50 

88.00 

i 

78 

92.00 

91.00 

90.50 

91.00 

90.31 

79 

^ 

92.75 

91.00 

91.00 

90.00 

80 

92.00 

91.00 

90.50 

90.00 

91.03 

81 

92.50 

90.00 

91.50 

92.00 

82 

92.50 

89.00 

91.00 

92.50 

91.40 

83 

93.00 

89.00 

91.00 

92.50 

84 

92.00 

90.00 

92.00 

91.50 

91.37 

85 

91.50 

89.00 

89.50 

92.00 

86 

92.50 

88.00 

89.50 

92.50 

90.56 

87 

92.50 

90.00 

90.00 

93.00 

88 

92.00 

89.50 

91.50 

91.50 

91.25 

89 

91.50 

91.00 

89.50 

90.00 

90 

91.50 

90.50 

91.00 

92.00 

90.87 

91 

92.50 

89.00 

89.50 

93.00 

92 

92.75 

89.50 

90.50 

90.00 

90.84 

93 

91.75 

92.00 

91.00 

92.50 

94 

92.00 

92.00 

89.50 

91.00 

91.47 

95 

93.25 

92.50 

90.50 

90.00 

96 

93.00 

92.00 

91.50 

90.50 

91.65 

97 

93.50 

90.00 

91.50 

93.00 

98 

93.50 

90.00 

92.00 

93.00 

92.06 

99 

92.00 

90.50 

90.00 

92.50 

100 

91.50 

91.00 

89.50 

90.00 

90.87 

1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


393 


TABLE  14 — Continued 


Unpasteurized 

Pasteurized 

Tub 

No. 

McKay 

New- 
man 

Craw- 
ford 

Mittel- 
stadt 

Av. 
score 

McKay 

New- 
man 

Craw- 
ford 

Mittel- 
stadt 

Av. 
score 

101 

92.00 

90.00 

91.00 

92.00 

102 

92.00 

89.00 

92.00 

91.50 

91.18 

103 

91.00 

92.00 

91.50 

93.00 

104 

92.50 

92.00 

91.50 

93.50 

92.12 

105 

92.00 

90.50 

91.50 

89.00 

106 

92.75 

91.00 

91.50 

91.00 

91.15 

107 

92.50 

90.00 

90.50 

91.00 

108 

92.50 

92.00 

91.00 

93.50 

91.62 

Av. 

92.07 

90  82 

91   34 

91   98 

92   50 

90  98 

91   31 

91  .54 

Gain. 

0.03 

0.44 

0.43 

0.16 

Result  of  McKay's  Scoring. — An  average  of  92.07  for  the  unpas- 
teurized  butter  and  92.5  for  the  pasteurized  butter,  or  an  average  of 
0.43  of  a  point  higher  for  the  pasteurized. 

The  butter  from  11  out  of  the  26  churnings  of  unpasteurized 
cream  scored  higher  than  the  butter  from  corresponding  churnings  of 
pasteurized  cream  by  one-eighth  to  one  and  three-fourths  points. 
While  from  the  15  corresponding  churnings  of  pasteurized  and  un- 
pasteurized cream  the  gain,  was  from  one-eighth  to  three  and  three- 
fourths  points  in  favor  of  the  pasteurized.  The  variation  in  score  on 
two  tubs  packed  from  the  same  churning  was  as  follows : 

Unpasteurized  butter : 

From  6  churnings,  same  score;  5,  a  variation  of  one-fourth  point; 
2,  one-half  point;  4,  three-fourths;  5,  one  point;  and  4,  one  and  one- 
half  points. 

Pasteurized  butter: 

From  1  churning,  same  score ;  8,  a  variation  of  one-fourth  point ; 
4,  one-half  point;  4V  three-fourths;  6,  one;  and  3,  one  point. 

Result  of  Newman's  Scoring. — An  average  of  90.82  for  the  un- 
pasteurized and  90.98  for  the  pasteurized,  or  an  average  of  0.16  points 
higher  for  the  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized  cream.  The  butter 
from  corresponding  churnings  of  pasteurized  and  unpasteurized  cream 
for  one  day  scored  the  same.  The  butter  from  10  out  of  the  26  churn- 
ings of  unpasteurized  cream  scored  higher  by  one-half  to  four  points. 
From  the  other  15  comparisons  the  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized 
cream  scored  higher  by  one-fourth  to  four  points. 

Variation  in  score  on  duplicate  tubs  packed  from  same  churning 
of  unpasteurized  butter  was  as  follows : 

From  8  churnings,  same  score;  6,  a  variation  of  one-half  point; 
10,  a  variation  of  one 'point;  and  2,  a  variation  of  two  points. 

The  pasteurized  butter  from  10  churnings,  the  duplicate  tubs, 
scored  the  same.  From  9  churnings,  a  variation  of  one-half  point;  6. 
a  variation  of  one  point;  and  1,  a  variation  of  two  points. 

Crawford's  scoring  gave  an  average  of  91.34  for  the  butter  from 
the  unpasteurized  and  91.31  for  the  pasteurized,  or  an  average  of  0.03 


394 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[Septetnber, 


of  a  point  higher  for  the  unpasteurized  butter.  The  butter  from  both 
the  pasteurized  and  unpasteurized  cream  scored  the  same  on  two 
comparisons.  The  unpasteurized  butter  from  15  out  of  the  26  com- 
parisons, scored  higher  by  one-fourth  to  two  points  than  the  butter 
from  the  pasteurized  cream,  while  the  butter  from  the  pasteurized 
cream  in  the  other  9  comparisons  scored  higher  by  one-fourth  to  one 
and  one-fourth  points. 

Scores  on  duplicate  tubs  were  as  follows : 

Unpasteurized  butter: 

From  7  churnings,  no  variation ;  9,  a  variation  of  one-half  point ; 
6,  one  point;  3,  one  and  one-half;  and  1,  two  and  one-half  points. 

Pasteurized  butter: 

From  3  churnings,  no  variation  between  duplicate  tubs;  15,  a 
variation  of  one-half  point;  5,  one  point;  2,  one  and  one-half;  1, 
three  points. 

Result  of  Mittelstadt's  Scoring. — An  average  of  91.98  for  the  un- 
pasteurized and  91.54  for  the  pasteurized  butter,  or  an  average  of  0.44 
of  a  point  higher  for  the  unpasteurized.  The  butter  from  both  the 
pasteurized  and  unpasteurized  cream  scored  the  same  for  two  compari- 
sons. The  butter  from  16  churnings  out  of  the  26  of  unpasteurized 
cream  scored  higher  than  the  butter  from  the  pasteurized  cream  by 
one-fourth  to  three  and  one-fourth  points.  While  from  the  other  8 
comparisons,  the  gain  was  in  favor  of  the  pasteurized  by  one-fourth 
to  two  and  one-fourth  points. 

Variation  in  score  on  duplicate  tubs  as  follow : 

Unpasteurized  butter: 

From  3  churnings,  no  variation;   9,  a  variation  of  one-half  point; 

3,  one  point;   4,  one  and  one-half  points;   6,  two  points,  and  1,  three 
points. 

Pasteurized  butter: 

From  2  churnings,  no  variation;  4,  a  variation  of  one-half  point; 
6,  one  point;  3,  one  and  one-half;  3,  two  points;  3,  two  and  one-half; 

4,  three  points;  and  1,  four  points. 

TABLE  16.    VARIATION  IN  SCORE  ON  DUPLICATE  TUBS  DECEMBER  27,  1907 


Extent  of  variation 

0 

X 

H 

K 

1 

IK 

2 

2^ 

3 

3^ 

4 

McKay 

Unpast. 

6 

5 

2 

4 

5 

4 

Past. 

1 

8 

4 

4 

6 

3 

Newman 

Unpast. 

8 

6 

10 

2 

Past. 

10 

9 

6 

1 

Crawford 

Unpast. 

7 

9 

6 

3 

1 

Past. 

3 

15 

5 

2 

1 

Mittelstadt 

Unpast. 

3 

9 

3 

4. 

6 

1 

Past. 

2 

4 

6 

3 

4 

2 

4 

1 

1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


395 


TABLE  15.    AVERAGE,  HIGHEST  AND  LOWEST,  OF  THE  EIGHT  DIFFERENT  SCORES  ON 
THE  SAME  BUTTER  DECEMBER  27,  1907 


Unpasteurized 

•    Pasteurized 

p.m. 
a.  m. 

Tub 

No. 

Av. 

Highest 

Lowest 

Tub 

No. 

Av. 

Highest 

Lowest 

5,  6 
9,  10 

92.31 
92.87 

94.     M. 

94.     M. 

91.     Me. 

92.     N. 

7,  8 
11,  12 

92.17 
91.87 

93.  Mc.M.N. 
93.5  M. 

91.     C. 
90.5  M. 

p.m. 
a.  m. 

13,  14 

17,  18 

92.31 
91.81 

93  .  5  Me. 
93.5  Me. 

91.5  N.  C. 

90.     N. 

15,16 
19,  20 

92.15 
92.15 

93.     Mc.N. 
93.25  Me. 

90.     M. 
90.     M. 

p.m. 
a  m. 

21,  22 
25,  26 

91.75 
92.31 

93.     M. 

93.     N. 

91.    McNC. 
91.     M. 

23,  24 
27,  28 

91.28 
92.03 

92.75  Me. 
92.5McCM. 

89.5  M. 
91.     C. 

p.m. 
a.m. 

29,  30 
33,  34 

91.93 
91.93 

93.5  M. 

93.     N.   M 

90.5  N. 
.  91.     Me. 

31,  32 
35,  36 

91.93 
92.12 

93.25  Me. 
93  .     McM. 

91.     M. 
91.     C. 

p.m. 
a  m. 

37,  38 
41,  42 

92.47 
92.44 

94.     M. 
93.5  M. 

91.     N. 
90.     N. 

39,  40 
43,  44 

91.68 
92.78 

93  .     McM. 
93.5  N.M. 

89.     M. 
91.     C. 

p.m. 

45,  46 

90.81 

92.5  C. 

89.     M. 

47,  48 

90.68 

92.     Me. 

89.     M. 

p.m. 
a  m. 

49,  50 
53,  54 

89.81 
89.81 

91.     Mc.C. 
93.     M. 

88.     N. 
88.     N. 

51,  52 

55,  56 

90.97 
91.93 

92.5  Me. 
93.5  Me. 

89.     N. 
90.5  C. 

p.m. 
a  m. 

p.m. 

57,  58 
61,  62 

91.84 
91.90 

93.5  N. 
93.     M. 

89.     M. 
90.     N. 

59,  60 
63,  64 

90.97 
90.84 

93  .     Me. 
93.     M. 

89.     N. 
88  .  5  C. 

65,  66 

92.28 

93.5  M. 

91.     C. 

67,  68 

91.62 

94.     M. 

89.     N. 

p.m. 
a.  m. 

69,  70 

73,  74 

91.15 
91.72 

92.25  Me. 
93.     M. 

90.     N.  M. 

90.     N. 

'71,  72 
'  75,  76 

91.44 
90.5 

93.5  M. 
93.     Me. 

90.     N. 
89.     N.M. 

p.m. 
a.  m. 

p.m. 
a  m. 

77,  78 
81,  82 

90.31 
91.40 

92.     Me. 
92.75  Me. 

88.     M. 
89.     N. 

79,  80 
83,  84 

91.03 
91.37 

92.75  Me. 
93  .     Me. 

90.     M. 

89.     N. 

85,  86 
89,  90 

90.56 
90.87 

92.5  Me.  M 
92.     M. 

88.     N. 
89.5  C. 

87,  88 
91,  92 

91.25 
90.84 

93.     M. 
93.     M. 

89.5  N. 

89.     N. 

p.m. 
a  m. 

93,  94 
97,  98 

91.47 
92.06 

92.5  M. 
93.5  Me. 

89.5  C. 

90.     N. 

95,  96 
99,  100 

91.65 
90.87 

93.25  Me. 
92.5  M. 

90.     M. 
89.5  C. 

p.m. 
a.  m. 

101,  102 
105,  106 

91.18 
91.15 

92.     Mc.M. 
92.75  Me. 

89.     N. 
89.     M. 

103,  104 
107,  108 

92.12 
91.62 

93.5  M. 
93.5  M. 

91.     Me. 

90.     N. 

Average 

91.55 

92.95 

89.84 

91.53 

93.06 

89.84 

396  BULLETIN  No.  138  [September, 

TABLE   17.     EFFECTS  OF  STORAGE  UPON  QUALITY  AND  EXTENT  OF  DECREASE 


Extent  of  decrease 

0 

Y± 

y*    y*    i 

ft 

.IH'IK 

2M 

3^ 

McKay 

Unpast. 

5 

2 

9 

7 

7 

4 

4 

3 

2 

Past. 

9 

10 

3 

4 

6 

2 

7 

2         1 

Extent  of  decrease     0 

K 

1 

m 

2      2J^ 

3 

SY*      4      4^ 

4% 

5      5  i  -, 

6 

New- 
man 

Unpast. 

1 

2 

3 

10 

5        10        1         4 

7 

1 

2        3         1 

Past. 

4 

1 

68        9 

3552 

2 

5         1 

Craw-  v 
ford 

Unpast. 

6 

4 

5       11 

5 

11 

3      3  ; 

1 

, 
1 

Past. 

5 

5 

1 

11 

7 

7 

7 

4 

1 

1 

Mittel- 
stadt 

Unpast. 

7 

8 

10 

11 

3 

4 

2 

1 

2 

2 

1 

1 

Past. 

3 

9 

5 

8 

8 

3 

7 

1 

7 

1 

According  to  McKay,  9  tubs  unpasteurized  butter  scored  higher 
by  one-fourth  to  one  point,  and  7  tubs  pasteurized  Gutter  by  one-fourth 
to  one-half  point.  Newman  scored  one  tub  unpasteurized  one  point 
higher  and  one  tub  pasteurized  one  point  higher.  Crawford  scored 
two  tubs  unpasteurized  one-half  and  one  point,  and  three  tubs  pasteur- 
ized one-half  to  one  and  one-half  points  higher  for  December  scoring. 


1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


397 


TABLE  18.     COMPARING  QUALITY  ON  BASIS  OF  AVERAGE  OF  ALL  SCORES  OF  JULY  25 

AND  DECEMBER  27.    ALSO  INDICATING  DECREASE  BETWEEN 

FIRST  AND  SECOND  SCORING 


Tub  No. 

Unpasteurized 

Pasteurized 

Scores 

Decrease 

|   Tub  No. 

Scores 

Decrease 

July  25 

Dec.  27 

July  25 

Dec.  27 

5,  6 
9,  10 

93.5 
93.66 

92.31 
92.87 

1.19 
0.79 

7,6 
11,  12 

93.59 
92.78 

92.17 
91.87 

1.42 
0.91 

13,  14 
17,  18 

93.56 
92.91 

92.31    7 
91.81 

1.25 
1.10 

15,  16 
19,  20 

93.66 
93.50 

92.15 
92.15 

1.51 
1.25 

21,  22 
25,  26 

93.62 
93.59 

91.75 
92.31 

1.87 
1.28 

23,  24 
27,  28 

92.5 
93.20 

91.28 
92.03- 

1.22 
1.17 

29,  30 
33,  34 

94.37 
93.5 

91.93 
91.93 

2.44 
1.57 

31,  32 

35,  36 

93.09 
93.15 

91.93 
92.12 

1.16 
1.03 

37,  38 
41,  42 

94.15 
94.00 

92.47 
92.44 

1.68 
J.56 

39,  40 
43,  44 

93.69 
93.93 

91.68 
92.78 

2.01 
1.15 

45,  46 

93.25 

90.81 

2.44 

47,  48 

93.07 

90.68 

2.39 

49,  50 
53,  54 

91.62 
92.5 

89.81 
89.91 

1.81 
2.69 

51,  52 

55,  56 

92.47 
93.22 

90.97 
91.93. 

1.50 
1.29 

57,  58 
61,  62 

93.06 
93.22 

91.84 
91.90 

1.22 
1.32 

59,  60 
63,  64 

93.37 
93.19 

90.97 
90.84 

2.40  - 
2.35 

65,  66 

93.09 

92.28 

0.81 

67,  68 

93.41 

91.62 

1.79 

69,  70 

73,  74 

93.22 
93.37 

91.15 
91.72 

2.07 
1.65 

71,  72 

75,  76 

92.03 
92.69 

91.44 
90.5 

0.59 
2.19 

77,  78 
81,  82 

93.53 
93.69 

90.31 
91.40 

3.22  ; 

2.29 

79,  80 

83,  84 

r.  93.34 
!  93  .  5 

91.03 
91.37 

2.31 
2.31 

85,  86 
89,  90 

92.94 
92.72 

90.56 

90.87 

2.38 
1.85 

87,  88 
91,  92 

93.34 
93.06 

91.25 
90.84 

2.09 
2.22 

93,  94 
97,  98 

93.44 
93.87 

91.47 
92.06 

1.97 
1.81 

95,  96 
99,  100 

93.25 
94.22 

91.65 

90.87 

1.60 
3.35 

101,  102 
105,  106 

93.66 
93.50 

91.18 
91.15 

2.48 
2.35 

103,  104 
107,  108 

93.19 
93.09 

92.12 
91.62 

1.07 
1.37 

Lverage 

93.37 

91.55 

1.80 

93.22 

91.53 

1.67 

398 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


TABLE  19.   VARIATION  IN  SCORE  ACCORDING  TO  EACH  JUDGE  ON  104  TUBS  OF  BUTTER 
BETWEEN  JULY  25  AND  DECEMBER  27 

1907 


Unpasteurized 

Pasteurized 

Tub 
No. 

McKay 

Newman 

Crawford 

Mittlestadt 

Tub 
No. 

McKay 

Newman 

Crawford 

Mittelstadt 

o 

a 
§ 

G 

Q 

V 

% 

i 

c 

V 

8- 

i 

V 

o 

V 

la 

0 
C 

i 

V 

Q 

V 

% 

V 

o 
c 

S 

V 
0 

Q 

i 

^ 

c 

I 
E 

0 

O 

V 

1 

c 

0 

c 

u 

a 

I 

V 

Q 

i 

• 

V 

o 

V 

a 

u 

!• 

0 
V 

Q 

V 

a 
u 

0 

c 

V 

a 
C 

Q 

9 

N 

C 

5 
6 

9 

10 

2M 

K 

% 

2 
3 

2 
2 

N 
Cha 

IK 

K 

0 

nge 
K 

1 

K 

N 
Cha 

O 

nge 

7 
8 

11 
12 

1 

1 

N 
Cha 

1 

O 

nge 

1 

N 
Cha 
2 

O 

nge 

2 

2 
2K 

K 
K 

13 
14 
17 

18 

i 

M 

2 

5 

2 

2K 

iK 
K 

N 
Cha 
N 
Cha 

o 
nge 
o 
nge 

15 
16 
19 

20 

M 

2 
2 
3 

1 

K 

N 
Cha 
K 

O 

nge 

4 
2 
K 

4 

— 

21 
22 

25 

26 

i 

4 

2K 

2 

IK 

i 

*  x2 
x2 

23 
24 
27 

28 

M 

K 

3 

1 

IK 

N 
Cha 
K 

K 

o 
nge 

3K 

IK 
IK 

29 
30 

33 
34 

i 
IK 

3 
4K 

2 

K 

3 

1  /2 

i 

31 
32 

35 
36 

K 

M 

1 

N 
Cha 
1 

0 

nge 

2 
2K 

3 
2K 

i 

IK 

2 

N 
Cha 
N 
Cha 

O 

nge 

0 

nge 

37 
38 

41 

42 

i 

N 
Cha 

0 

nge 

4 
2 

3 
4K 

"  /2 
3  /^i 

i 

i 
N 
Cha 

o 
nge 

39 

40 

43 
44 

No 
Change 

K 

No 
Change 

2 

3 
3K 

2 
3 

K 
3 

1 

K 

45 
46 

IK 

K 

3 
3 

3 

«8 

47 
48 

K 

2 
3 

2K 
3 

3 
3 



49 

50 
53 

54 

IK 
IK 

3K 

3K 

3 

5 

3 

1 

2 

N 
Cha 

0 

nge 

Chs 

1 

o 
mge 

51 

52 
55 

56 

K 

N 
Cha 
3 
2 

0 

nge 

IK 
IK 

2 

IK 

4 
1 

2 

1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


39$ 


TABLE  19 — Continued 


Unpasteurized 

Pasteurized 

Tub 

No. 

57 
58 
61 
62 

McKay 

Newman 

Crawford 

Mittlestadt 

Tub 
No. 

McKay 

Newman 

Crawford 

Mittelstadt 

• 

a 

V 

Q 

I 
i! 

u 

c 

V 

8 

i 

Q 

u 

a 

i 

V 

Q 

i! 

• 

u 

b 

U 

C 

u 

8 
1 

V 

Q 

S 

a 

V 

0 

c 
f*'"' 

u 
p 

G 

u 

a 
e 

0 

c 

V 

8 

V 
0 

u 

Q 

1 

o 

J3 

a 

V 

ha 

e  . 

• 

1 

u 

O 

£5 

u 

& 

O 

c 

« 

V 
0 
V 

O 

8 
g 

B 

H 

N 
Cha 

H 

O 

nge 

1A 

1 
1 

4M 

2K 

1 

K 

N 
Cha 
1H 

O 

nge 

2 

4 

1M 

N 
Cha 

0 

nge 

59 
60 
63 
64 

X 

IK 
H 

IK 

5 
5 
5^ 
3M 

N 
Cha 
1M 

2K 
IK 

0 

nge 

4 
2 
3 

K 

65 
66 

N*o 
Change 
No 
Change 

3 
2 

N 
Cha 

1 

K 
Cha 

2 

2K 

1H 

0 

nge 

H 

N 
Cha 

0 

nge 

67 
68 

N 
Cha 
2M 

0 

nge 

4K 
2 

2K 
2 

K 
K 

69 
70 
73 
74 

H 

% 
1A 

% 

3 

4K 
3 

3K 

0 

nge 

4 

1« 

1 

y2 

71 

72 
75 
76 

IK 

M 

N 
Cha 
N 
Cha 

o 
nge 

0 

nge 

N 
Cha 

^A 
3H 

0 

nge 
1 

IK 

N 
Cha 
2K 

2 

o 
nge 

IK 
i 

4 
2 

77 

78 
81 

82 

iy± 

1A 
iji 

1 

4K 

2K 
4K 

SK 

4K 

2K 
IK 

2 

6 

3 
2M 

2 

79 

80 
83 

84 

No 
Change 
1 
No 
Change 

IK 

3 

2 

5 

4M 

3 

2K 
3 

2 

4 

3 
N 
Cha 
1 

O 

nge 

85 

86 
89 
90 

1 

H 
H 

i'H 

4K 
6 

1H 

2K 

1% 

2H 

4)l 

Cha 

0 

nge 

1^ 

IH 

3^i 

87 

88 
91 
92 

N 
Cha 
IX 

K 
X 

0 

nge 

3J^ 

5 
2^ 

1H 

3 

3K 
3K 

K 

IK 

3 

IK 

4 

93 
94 
97 
98 

i 
X 

N 
Cha 

K 

0 

nge 

2 
2M 

5K 



2 
3^ 

1H 

2 

1 
3 
1 
1 

95 
96 
99 

100 

H 
1H 

K 

2^ 

5 
4 

1 

IK 

4 
2 

3K 

K 

4 
4K 

3 
2K 
2K 
4K 

101 
102 
105 
106 

H 
H 

X 

4K 
5K 
4 
3 

3 
1 
2K 
1^ 

2 
2^ 

5 
2^ 

103 
104 
107 
108 

i« 

1A 
M 

IK 
K 
IK 
N 
Cha 

o 

nge 

IK 
K 

2 
1 

400  BULLETIN  No.  138  [September, 

1908 

This  work  was  carried  on  at  the  University  creamery,  using  all 
the  butter  fat  delivered  in  both  the  milk  and  cream  from  May  2  until 
June  30.  The  milk  contained  a  total  of  3,614  pounds  of  butter  fat. 
Deliveries  were  made  daily  by  the  patrons.  The  milk  was  skimmed 
and  the  cream  was  stored  in  the  refrigerator  until  the  churning  days. 

The  remainder  of  the  butter  fat  was  delivered  in  cream.  During 
May,  65  patrons  made  435  deliveries  and  in  June,  71  patrons,  571  de- 
liveries. The  cream  patrons  were  asked  to  consider  Tuesdays  and 
Fridays  the  regular  cream  receiving  days.  A  few  of  them  did  not 
comply  with  this  request,  but  delivered  when  convenient.  The  cream 
delivered  irregularly  was  stored  with  the  cream  from  the  milk. 

For  example,  cream  delivered  on  Saturday  was  not  churned  until 
the  following  Tuesday.  Wednesday's  and  Thursday's  deliveries  were, 
as  a  rule,  churned  on  Friday. 

Since  most  of  the  cream  was  delivered  twice  a  week,  the  acidity 
was  comparatively  high  when  received  and  the  quality  from  day  to  day 
was  very  uniform.  On  the  regular  churning  days,  all  of  the  cream  in 
the  refrigerator  was  placed  in  the  receiving  vat  and  mixed  with  that 
day's  delivery.  While  the  cream  was  being  divided  it  was  kept  stirred, 
one-half  flowing  directly  into  the  pasteurizer  and  heated  to  a  tempera- 
ture of  180°  F.  This  was  collected  from  the  cooler  in  20  gallon  ca'ns. 
While  these  cans  were  filling,  cans  of  similar  size  were  being  filled 
with  unpasteurized  cream  from  the  same  vat.  By  this  method  it  was 
possible  to  fill  two  cans  at  the  same  time  with  the  same  grade  of 
cream,  one  of  which  was  pasteurized. 

The  smallest  lot  of  cream  handled  for  a  single  day's  comparison 
was  2096  pounds.  The  average  number  of  pounds  of  cream  for  the 
20  churning  days  was  2848.  In  most  cases  as  soon  as  a  portion  of  the 
cream  was  in  the  ripener,  the  cooling  was  begun.  The  first  three  and 
the  last  one  of  the  20  comparisons  of  pasteurized  and  unpasteurized 
cream  were  held  at  churning  temperature  from  12  to  15  hours.  Starter, 
thoroly  mixed,  then  divided  equally  was  added  to  both  the  pasteurized 
and  unpasteurized  cream  for  the  first  six,  the  eighth  and  the  last  eight 
comparisons.  With  the  other  five  no  starter  was  used  on  account  of 
limited  vat  capacity. 

On  each  day  after  the  cream  had  been  divided  both  lots  were 
again  divided  and  churned  in  two  different  churns. 

Four  30  pound  tubs  of  butter  were  packed  from  each  churning, 
making  a  total  of  eight  tubs  each  of  pasteurized  and  unpasteurized 
butter.  Two  tubs  from  each  of  the  80  churnings  were  shipped  to  New 
York  and  the  other  160  tubs  stored  in  Chicago.  The  total  amount  of 
butter  made  for  this  experiment  was  21,523  pounds. 

The  following  Table  shows  the  days  when  the  cream  was  divided, 
the  percent  of  fat  and  acidity  of  the  cream  before  it  was  divided,  total 
pounds  in  the  pasteurized  and  unpasteurized  lots  and  pounds  of  starter 
added  to  each ;  number  of  hours  cream  was  heM  at  ripening  temper- 
ature before  cooled  to  churning  temperature,  also  number  of  hours  the 
cream  was  held  cold  before  churning. 


1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


401 


TABLE  20.     RECORD  OF  HANDLING  THE  CREAM  BEFORE  IT  WAS  CHURNED  IN  MAKING 
THE  1908  EXPERIMENTAL  BUTTER 


rp  4.  -I 

Lb. 

Hrs.  at 

TT      l-^IJ 

Date 

lotal 
Lb. 

Percent 
Fat 

Acidity 

Past. 

lot. 

Unpast. 

lot 

Starter 

ripening 
temp. 

rlrs.  held 
cold 

5/6 

2654 

30.5 

.36 

1320 

1334 

169 

2  hours 

15-17 

5/8 

3045 

31. 

.40 

1530 

1515 

240 

2  " 

15-17 

5/12 

3112 

31. 

.52 

1555 

1557 

123 

l/i  hour 

15-17 

5/15 

2827 

31  J 

.52 

1416 

1411 

245 

At  once 

4-6 

5/19 

2881 

33. 

.50 

1448 

1433 

250 

3-5 

5/22 

2990 

33. 

.50 

1430 

1460 

236 

3-5 

5/26 

3363 

31.5 

.54 

1689 

1674 

None 

6-4 

5/29 

2879 

31. 

.52 

1458 

1421 

212 

6-4 

6/2 

3224 

32. 

.50 

1615 

1609 

None 

5-3  Yi 

6/5 

3322 

32. 

.52 

1651 

1671 

None 

3-5 

6/9 

3525 

32.5 

.54 

1759 

1766 

None 

3-5 

6/12 

3402 

32. 

.49 

1721 

1681 

None 

3-5 

6/16 

2754 

33. 

.50 

1386 

1368 

271 

3-5 

6/18 

2234 

31. 

.50 

1121 

1113 

282 

3-5 

6/19 

3054 

29.5 

.50 

1548 

1506 

168 

3-0 

6/23 

2904 

31. 

.48 

1476 

1428 

240 

3-5 

6/25 

2096 

32. 

•  .57 

1095 

1001 

283 

3-5 

6/26 

2505 

29.5 

.50 

1255 

1220 

286 

3-4 

6/30 

2136 

31. 

.50 

1068 

1068 

142 

3-5 

7/1  a.m. 

2158 

24.5 

.50 

108$ 

1073 

150 

12-14 

THE  1908  BUTTER  WHICH  WAS  SHIPPED  TO  CHICAGO 
All  of  the  butter  shipped  to  Chicago  was  putin  cold  storage  within 
twenty  hours  after  it  was  taken  out  of  the  University  Refrigerator. 
The  temperature  of  the  University  refrigerator  was  about  32°  F. 

Table  showing  when  each  shipment  reached  the  Monarch  Refrig- 
erators in  Chicago^  and  the  age  of  the  butter  at  that  time  is  given 
below. 

Number  of  tubs  Date  placed  in  storage  Date  butter  was  made   Age    in    days 


24 

May    16/1908 

May     6,    9,  13,  1908 

3  to  10 

16                       May   23,  1908 

May          15,  19,  1908 

4  to    8 

16  '                    May   28,  1908 

May          22,26,  1908 

2  to     6 

16                        June     4,  1908 

May   29,    6,    2,  1908 

2  to     5 

16                        June  12,  1908 

June            5,    9,  1908 

3  to     7 

16 

June  19,  1908 

June         12,  16,  1908 

3  to     7 

24 

June  25,  1908 

June  18,  19,23,  1908 

2  to     7 

32 

July      3,  1908 

June  25,  26,  27  and 

2  "to     8 

July                   1,1908 

CHICAGO  LOT 

The  temperature  of  the  Chicago  storage  room  ranged  from  8  to 
12°  below  zero.  July  13,  all  of  the  butter  was  taken  out  of  the  refrig- 
erator and  placed  in  a  tempering  room  where  it  gradually  warmed  to 
scoring  condition.  July  14,  the  160  tubs  of  butter  were  scored  by  five 
judges,  each  working  independently  with  no  knowledge  of  what  tubs 
contained  pasteurized  or  unpasteurized  butter,  or  which  tubs  were 
duplicates. 


402 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


TABLE  21.   RESULT  OF  THE  FIVE  JUDGES  WORK  OF  SCORING  THE  160  TUBS  OF  BUTTER 
IN  CHICAGO  ON  JULY  14,  1908 


Pasteurized 

Unpasteurized 

Vat 

No. 

Churn 

No. 

Tub 
No. 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Mc- 
Kay 

Wool- 
ver 
ton 

Lee 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Mc- 
Kay 

Wool- 
ver- 
ton 

Lee 

1 

1 
2 

201 
203 

202 
204 

93.0 
93.0 
93.0 
93.0 

94.0 
92.0 
93.0 
92.5 

92.75 
91.50 
92.25 
92.5 

93.5 
93.0 
93.5 
93.5 

92.5, 
93.0 
93.0 
93.0 

3 
4 

205 
207 
206 
208 

93.0 
93.0 
93.0 
92.5 

94.0 
93.0 
93.0 
91.5 

93.0 
91.0 
92.25 
92.75 

94.0 
93.0 
92.0 
93.0 

93.0 
93.5 
93. 
92.5 

Av.  92.87 

Av.  92.80 

2 

5 
6 

209    93.0 
211    93.0 
210    93.0 
212    93.0 

94.0 
93.0 
93.0 
93.0 

92.0 
91.75 
91.5 
92.75 

93.5 
93.5 
93.0 
93.0 

93.0 
92.0 
93  .-0 
93.0 

7 
8 

213 
215 
214 
216 

93.0      90.0      91.0 
92.5      92.0      91.0 
93.0      91.0      91.0 
92.0      93.0      92.0 

93.0 
92/0 
93.5 
93.5 

92.0 
92.5 
92.0 
92.0 

Av.  92.85 

Av.  92  .  10 

3 

9 
10 

217 

219 
218 
220 

92.0 
91.0 
91.5 
91.  r> 

90.5 
90.5 
91.5 
90.0 

92.75 
92.0 
92.25 
92.5 

92.0 
92.5 
92.0 
90.0 

90.5 
90.5 
92.5 
90.5 

11         221 
223 
12        222 
224 

92.0 
92.0 
92.5 
92.5 

92.0 
92.5 
93.0 
91.5 

90.0 
92.0 
91.0 
93.0 

93.5 
92.0 
93.5 
93.0 

92.0 
91.0 
93.0 
92.0 

Av.  91.42 

Av.  92  .  20 

4 

13        225 
227 
14        226 
228 

92.5 
91.5 
93.0 
92.5 

91.5 
91.0 
92.0 
90.5 

91.5 
92.0 
92.75 
92.0 

92.0 
92.5 
92.5 
93.0 

91.5 
92.0 
92.0 
92.0 

15 
16 

229 
231 
230 
232 

93.0 
93.5 
93.0 
92.5 

93.0      91.5 
90.5      90.5 
92.0      91.5 
93.5      91.0 

93.0 
93.0 
93.0 
93.5 

92.0 
90.5 
92.0 
92.5 

Av.  92.01 

Av.  92  .  25 

1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 
TABLE  21 — Continued 


403 


Pasteurized 

Unpasteurized 

Vat 

No. 

Churn 
No. 

Tub 

No. 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Mc- 
Kay 

Wool- 
ver- 
ton 

Lee 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Mc- 
Kay 

Wool- 
ver- 
ton 

Lee 

5 

17 
18 

233 
235 
234 
236 

93.0 
92.0 
93.0 
92.0 

93.0 
92.0 
92.0 
91.0 

92.0 
92.0 
92.0 
92.75 

92.0 
93.0 
92.0 
93.5 

92.0 
93.0 
92.0 
90.5 

'  19 
20 

237 
239 
238 
240 

93.0 
93.0 
93.5 
93.0 

93.0 
92.0 
93.0 
92.0 

92.5 
91.5 
92.0 
92.5 

93.0 
92.0 
93.0 

03  .  5 

92.5 
92.0 
92.5 
92.5 

Av.  92.23 

Av.  92.60 

21 

241 

93.0 

93.5 

92.5 

93.5 

92.0 

243 

93.0 

93.0 

92.0 

93.5 

92.5 

22 

242 

93.0 

91.0 

92.0 

93.0 

92.5 

244 

93.0 

93.5 

92.0 

93.5 

92.5 

A 

23 

245 

93.0 

93.5 

92.5 

93.0 

93.5 

247 

93.0 

94.0 

93.0 

94.0 

93.5 

24 

246 

92.5 

90.0 

92.0 

90.0 

92.5 

248 

93.0 

92.5 

92.5 

92.0 

93.0 

Av.  92.72 

Av.  92.65 

25 

249 

92.5 

92.0 

91.0 

93.0 

92.5 

251 

93.0 

93.0 

93.0 

92.5 

93.0 

26 

250 

93.0 

93.5 

92.0 

93.5 

92.0 

252 

93.0 

91.5 

93.0 

93.0 

92.5 

7 

27 

253 

93.0 

93.5 

92.5 

93.0 

93.0 

255 

93.0 

93.0 

92.5 

92.0 

93.0 

28 

254 

93.0 

93.0 

91.5 

93.0 

92.5 

256 

93.0 

92.5 

92.5 

93.5 

92.0 

Av.  92.62 

Av.  92.75 

29 

257 

93.0 

92.5 

92.5 

93.0 

92.0 

259  93.0 

93.0 

92.5 

92.0 

91.5 

30 

258  93.5 

90.5 

92.5 

93.0 

90.5 

g 

260 

93.0 

93.0 

92.0 

93.0 

92.0 

31 

261 

93.0 

93.0 

92.5 

90.0 

92.0 

263 

92.5 

93.5 

91.75 

93.0 

93.0 

32 

262 

93.0 

93.0 

91.5 

93.0 

92.0 

264 

9*3.0 

92.0 

92.0 

90.0 

92.0 

Av.  92.40 

Av.  92.28 

404 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


TABLE  21 — Continued 


Pasteurized 

Unpasteurized 

• 

Vat 
No. 

Churn 
No. 

Tub 

No. 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Mc- 
Kay 

Wool- 
ver- 
ton 

Lee 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Mc- 
Kay 

Wool- 
ver- 
ton 

Lee 

9 

33 
34 

265 
267 
266 
268 

92.0 
92.5 
91.5 
92.5 

93.0 
92.5 
91.5 
92.0 

91.0 
90.5 
92.25 
92.75 

92.0 
92.0 
92.5 
93.0 

92.5 
92.5 
92.5 
92.5 

35 
36 

269 
271 
270 
272 

92.0 
92.0 
93.0 
93.0 

93.0 
93.0 
92.0 
93.0 

91.0 
92.25 
92.75- 
91.7* 

88.0 
93.0 
92.0 
93.0 

92.0 
92.5 
92.0 
92.5 

Av.  92.17 

Av.  92.18 

10 

37 
38 

273 
275 
274 
276 

93.0 
92.5 
93.0 
93.0 

92.5 
90.0 
93.0 
92.0 

91.75 
91.75 
92.5 
92.5 

93.0 
93.0 
93.5 
92.0 

92.5 
92.0 
92.5 
92.5 

'}) 
, 

39 
40 

277 
279 
278 
280 

92.5 
93.0 
93.0 
93.0 

91.5 
93.0 
93.5 
93.0 

92.0 
91.0 
92.75 
92.75 

93.5 
92.0 
93.0 
93.0 

92.5 
93.0 
93.0 
93.0 

Av.  92.42 

Av.  92.70 

11 

41 
42 

281 
283 
282 
284 

93.0 
92.5 
93.0 
93.0 

92.5 
92.5 
-91.5 
92.0 

91.5 
91.0 
92.0 
92.0 

92.0 
93.0 
92.0 
92.5 

93.0 
92.0 
92.5 
93.0 

- 

- 

43 

44 

285 
287 
286 
288 

92.5 
92.5 
93.0 
93.0 

93.0 
92.0 
93.0 
92.5 

91.5 
92.0 
92.25 
91.75 

87.0 
92.0 
93.0 
93.0 

92.0 
92.5 
92.5 
92.5 

Av.  92.32 

Av.  92.07 

12 

45 
46 

289    93.0 
291    93.0 
290    93.0 
292    93.0 

91.0 
90.5 
90.5 
91.5 

91.0 
92.5 
92.0 
92.0. 

90.0 
93.0 
93.0 
93.0 

92.5 
92.5 
92.0 
92.5 

47 

48 

293 
295 
294 
296 

93.0 
92.5 
92.0 
93.0 

93.5 
93.0 
93.0 
92.0 

93.0 
92.5 
92.5 
91.5 

93.5 
93.0 
93.0 
93.0 

93.0 
92.0 
91.5 
92.5 

Av.  92.07 

Av.  92.65 

1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


405 


TABLE  21 — Continued 


Pasteurized 

Unpc'.steurized 

'Vat 

No. 

Churn 

No. 

Tub 

No. 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Mc- 
.Kay 

Wool- 
ver- 
ton 

Lee 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Mc- 
Kay 

Wool- 
ver- 
ton 

Lee 

13 

49 
50 

297 
299 
298 
300 

93.0 
92.5 
92.5 
93.0 

91.5 
93.0 
92.0 
92.0 

92.0 
91.5 
92.0 
91.0 

92.0 
93.0 
92.0 
89.0 

92.5 
92.0 
92.0 
92.5 

51 
52 

301 
303 
302 
304 

92.0 
92   5 
93.0 
93.0 

92.5 
93.0 
93.0 
92.0 

93.0 
91.75 
91.5 
91.5 

89.0 
87.0 
92.0 
93.0 

92.0 
92.5 
92.5 
92.5 

Av.  92.05 

Av.  91.96 

14 

53 
54 

305 
307 
306 
308 

93.5 
93.0 
93.0 
93.0 

90.5 
90.5 
91.5 
92.5 

93.0 
93.0 
92.5 
92.5 

86.0 
90.0 
92.0 
90.0 

93.0 
93.0 
93.0 
92.5 

55 
56 

309 
311 
310 
312 

93.0 
93.0 
93.0 
93.0 

92.0 
93.0 
92.5 
92.0 

92.5 
91.0 
92.5 
92.0 

93.0 
92.5 
92.0 
93.0 

93.0 
93.0 
92.5 
93.0 

Av.  91.90 

Av.  92.57 

15 

57 
58 

313 
315 
314 
316 

93.0 
93.0 
93.5 
93.0 

92.0 
92.5 
93.0 
92.5 

93.0 
93.0 
92.5 
92.25 

93.0 
93.0 
93.0 
92.0 

92.5 
92.5 
92.0 
92.5 

59 
60 

317 
319 
318 
320 

94.0 
94.0 
93.5 
93.5 

93.0 
93.0 
93.0 
92.5 

92.25 
92.5 
92.5 
92.0 

92.5 
90.0 
93.0 
92.0 

92.5 
92.5 
92.5 
93.0 

Av.  92.68 

Av.  92.68 

16 

61 
62 

321 
323 
322 
324 

93.0 
92.5 
93.0 
93.0 

93.0 
92.0 
91.5 
93.0 

91.75 
92.0 
92.5 
91.0 

92.0 
92.0 
93.0 
87.0 

92.5 
92.0 
92.5 
92.5 

63 

64 

325 
327 
326 
328 

93.0 
93.0 
93.5 
93.0 

93.0 
93.0 
93.0 
92.5 

92.0 
92.75 
91.75 
91.5 

92.0 
93.0 
92.0 
87.0 

92.5 
93.0 
92.5 
93.0 

Av.  92.08 

Av.  92.35 

406 


BULLETIN  No.  138 
TABLE  21 — Continued 


[September, 


Pasteurized 

Unpasteurized 

Vat 
No. 

Churn 
No. 

Tub 

No. 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Mc- 
Kay 

Wool- 
ver- 
ton 

Lee 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Mc- 
Kay 

Wool- 

ver- 
ton 

Lee 

17 

65 
66 

329 
331 
330 
332 

91.0 
91.0 
91.5 
92.0 

88.0 
86.0 
86.0 
85.5 

90.5 
91.0 
91.0 
91.5 

87.0 
87.0 

86  :o 

86.0 

90.5 

90.5 
90.0 
90.0 

- 

67 
68 

333 
335 
334 
336 

91.0 
90.5 
90.5 
92.0 

92.0 
91.5 
90.0 
91.5 

90.5 
90.5 
90.0 
91.0 

87.0 
86.0 
86.0 
89.0 

90.5 
90.0 
90.0 
90.5 

Av.  89.50 

Av.  90.00 

18 

69 
70 

337 
339 
338 
340 

93.0 
93.5 
93.0 
92.5 

93.0 
92.5 
93.0 
93.0 

92.75 
92.5 
92.75 
91.75 

92.0 
93.0 
93.0 
93.0 

92.5 
92.0 
92.5 
92.5 

' 

71 
72 

341 
343 
342 
.344 

•93.5 
93.0 
92.0 
93.0 

93.0 
93.0 
92.0 
92.0 

91.5 
92.75 
91.5 
90.5 

93.0 
93.0 
92.5 
92.0 

92.5 
93.0 
92.5 
93.0 

Av.  92.68 

Av.  92.46 

19 

73 
74 

345 
347 
346 
348 

93.0 
93.0 
93.0 
93.0 

93.0 
93.0 
91.5 
91.0 

92.0 
92.5 
92.25 
92.5 

93.0 
93.0 
92.0 
93.0 

93.0 
92.0 
93.0 
92.0 

75 
76 

349 
351 
350 

352 

93.0 
93.0 
93.0 
93.0 

93.5 
93.0 
93.0 
93.0 

92.5 
92.0 
90.5 
92.5 

92.0 
93.0 
93.0 
9,3.5 

93.0 
92.5 
92.0 
92.5 

Av.  92.53 

Av.  92.67 

20 

77 
78 

353 
355 
354 
356 

93.0 
93.0 
91.0 
91.0 

91.5 
89.5 
92.5 
92.5 

92.0 
92.0 
93.0 
92.0 

92.5 
92.5 
93.0 
92.5 

92.5 
92.0 
93.0 
92.0 

79 
80 

357 
359 
358 
360 

** 

92.5 
93.5 
93.0 
93.0 

92.5 
93.0 
93.0 
93.0 

92.5 
92.5 
93.0 

92.5 

92.5 
87.0 
92.0 
92.0 

92.5 
92.5 
92.0 
92.0 

Av.  92.15 

Av.  92.37 

Av. 

92.7 

91.8 

92.1 

92.1 

92.2 

92.8 

92.6 

91.9 

92. 

92.4 

Gain 

0.2 

0.1 

0.1 

0.8 

0.2 

1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


407 


The  butter  had  all  been  scored  by  Lee  the  day  after  each  lot  of 
8  tubs  were  made. 

The  score  placed  upon  the  butter  at  that  time  was  the  same  as  the 
scores  recorded  in  Table  No.  31,  New  York  lot  of  butter.  Tubs  Nos. 
201  and  203  for  Chicago  were  packed  from  the  same  churning  as  401 
and  403  for  New  York,  202  and  204  Chicago  and  402  and  404  New 
York  from  same  churning,  the  two  churnings  taken  from  the  same  vat 
of  pasteurized  cream  May  6,  1908. 

Table  22  is  compiled  from  Table  21.  Each  of  the  twenty  com- 
parisons was  represented  by  four  tubs.  The  average  of  the  four 
scores  on  the  pasteurized  butter  from  Vat  1,  according  to  Crawford 
was  93 ;  Newman,  92.87 ;  McKay,  92.25 ;  Woolverton,  93.37 ;  and  Lee, 
92.87.  The  butter  made  from  the  same  cream  unpasteurized  received 
the  following  average  scores.  Crawford  and  Newman  92.87;  McKay, 
92.25 ;  Woolverton  and  Lee,  93.00.  On  this  day  two  of  the  judges 


a  g 

05  5 

§  § 

H  w 

w  fl 

<  o 


il 


*****    **********   -1—  *   *    *   * 
- 


*    *  *  *     *    *    *          4—  *  * 

*****          *********       .  *  *    * 

t^.  CN  in       CN  t--.       !•>•     ^r-  10  cs  CN       v>  CN  r- 

^-<oooOiooOr>.vOvO        t~-^-c  00 


408 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


favored  the  pasteurized,  one  the  unpasteurized  butter,  while  there  was 
no  difference  according  to  the  other  two  judges. 

This  shows  that  the  average  of  the  400  scores  on  pasteurized  com- 
pared with  the  400  on  unpasteurized  butter  gave  0.15  of  a  point  in 
favor  of  the  unpasteurized.  The  average  score  for  each  day's  make  of 
the  pasteurized  butter  for  eight  out  of  the  twenty  days  is  the  same  or 
higher  than  the  average  score  of  the  unpasteurized  butter. 

There  were  only  two  days  that  the  butter  made  from  the  pasteu- 
rized cream,  and  one  day  butter  from  unpasteurized  cream  did  not 
receive  one  or  more  scores  of  93  or  94.  A  comparison  somewhat 
similar  can  be  made  of  the  lowest  score  for  each  day.  The  judge  who 
was  responsible  for  the  lowest  score  sometimes  gave  the  highest  score 
on  a  duplicate  tub  of  the  same  day's  make. 

Tables  24  and  25  are  self  explanatory,  giving  the  result  of  scoring. 


SB 

o  H 


H 


K 


3   O 


y  •=<  o    .  o 


•  o    •  o. •  o 


C7\  xo  \O  ro  O  •* 


^  ON  ON  ON  O\ 


s,,> 


ON  ON  ON  OO  ON  ON  ON 


1       1       1       1       1       1       1       1       1       1       1       1       1 


1909]  PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER  409 

TABLE  24.    VARIATION  IN  SCORE  ON  DUPLICATE  TUBS,  JULY  14,  1908 


Mc- 
Kay 

Lee 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Extent  of 
variation 

0 

M 

H 

M 

1 

1M 

1^ 

2 

2K 

3 

4 

5 

5^ 

6 

Churn 

No. 

Past. 

1 

2 

6 

5 

3 
4 

7 
3 

i 

2 

0 

4 

i 

i 

1 
1 

1 
0 

Unpast. 

1 
2 

4 
2 

1 

1 

4 
9 

2 
0 

3 
6 

3 
0 

1 
0 

2 
2 



Past. 

1 
2 

6 
9 

10 
6 

4 
2 

2 

1 

Unpast. 

1 
2 

5 
7 

• 

11 
11 

3 
2 

1 

Past. 

1 
2 

9 
12 

8 
6 

3 

2 

Unpast. 

1 
2 

11 

11 

8 

5 

1 
3 

1 

Past. 

1 
2 

4 
4 

7 
6 

4 
4 

1 
3 

3 
1 

1 
2 

Unpast. 

1 
2  . 

4 
3 

9 

6 

4 
5 

1 

4 

1 
1 

1 
1 

Wool- 
ver- 
ton 

Past. 

1 

2 

9 

6 

4 
6 

5  ' 
2 

2 

2 

1 
1 

1 
2 

1 

2 
1 

1 

1 

Unpast. 

1 
2 

2 

5 

2 
6 

8 

5 

2 

1 
1 

1 

TABLE  25.    RESULT  OF  FIVE  JUDGES,  SCORING  160  TUBS  OF  BUTTER  MAKING  A  TOTAL 
OF  800  INDIVIDUAL  SCORES  TABULATED  ON  THE  BASIS  OF  LIKE  SCORE 


1 
Judges    i  Score         94 

93i 
3 

93 
7 
6 
16 

92| 
8 
6 

92J 
16 
19 

31 

92i 

5 
4 

92 

91-] 

91* 
6 
12 

2 

91 
8 
10 

90^ 

2 
5 
7 

90 

2 
2 

89^ 

89 

88 

87 

86 

85J 

McKay 

Past. 

23 
11 
22 
20 

5 
5 

— 

Unpast. 

Lee 

Past. 

Unpast. 

20 



30 

1 

1 

3 

2 

— 

Craw- 
ford 

Past. 

2 

4 

7 

50 
46 

11 
13 



5 
9 





5 
1 

5 
2 

— 



1 

— 

— 



Unpast. 

New- 
man 

Past. 

2 

3 

20 

12 

12 

11 

5 

8 

2 

1 

2 

1 

Unpast. 

2 

7 

37 

9 

15 

5 

1 

1 

3 

Wool- 
verton 

Past. 

2 

11 
10 

30 
32 



9 

4 



19 

18 





— 



4 

4 



1 
2 

3 

1 

3 

5 

3 

2 



Unpast. 

Totals      !   8 

| 

45 

264 

14 

154 

9 

154 

10 

37 

31 

33 

19 

1 

2 

8 

7 

1 

410  BULLETIN  No.  138  [September, 

Only  one  tub  of  butter  received  the  same  score  from  all  five 
judges. 

Reading  horizontally  Table  25  indicates  number  of  tubs  for  any 
given  score.  Ex.  8-94  scores  and  45-93*/2  and  so  on. 

SUMMARY  OF  JUDGES'  WORK,  JULY  14,  1908 

McKay,  Pasteurised.  7  tubs  scored  93;  8  tubs,  92%;  16  tubs, 
92^;  5  tubs,  92^4;  23  tubs,  92;  5  tubs,  91%;  6  tubs,  91}^;  8  tubs, 
91 ;  and  2  tubs,  9Ql/2.  Average  92.1.  Difference  between  highest  and 
lowest  score  2l/2  points.  Greatest  variation  between  duplicate  tubs  2 
points. 

Unpasteurized.  6  tubs  scored  93 ;  6  tubs,  92% ;  19  tubs,  92^  ;  4 
tubs,  92%;  11  tubs,  92;  5  tubs,  91%;  12  tubs,  91^;  10  tubs,  91;  5 
tubs,  90j/2  ;  2  tubs,  90.  Average  91.9.  Difference  between  highest  and 
lowest  3  points.  Greatest  variation  between  duplicate  tubs  2  points. 

Lee,  Pasteurized.  16  tubs  scored  93 ;  31  tubs,  92.5 ;  22  tubs,  92 ;  2 
tubs,  91.5 ;  7  tubs,  90.5 ;  2  tubs,  90.  Average  92.2.  Difference  between 
highest  and  lowest  score  3  points.  Greatest  variation  between  dupli- 
cate tubs  2  points. 

Unpasteurized.  3  tubs  scored  93.5 ;  20  tubs,  93 ;  30  tubs,  92.5 ; 
20  tubs,  92 ;  1  tub,  91.5 ;  1  tub,  91 ;  3  tubs,  90.5 ;  2  tubs,  90.  Average 
92.4.  Difference  between  highest  and  lowest  score  3l/2.  Greatest 
difference  between  duplicate  tubs  \l/2  points. 

Crawford,  Pasteurized.  4  tubs  scored  93.5;  50  tubs,  93;  11  tubs, 
92.5;  5  tubs,  92;  5  tubs,  91.5;  5  tubs,  91.  Average  92.7.  Difference 
between  highest  and  lowest  score  2l/2  points.  Greatest  difference  be- 
tween duplicate  tubs  1  point. 

Unpasteurized.  2  tubs  scored  94;  7  tubs,  93  ^  ;  46  tubs,  93 ;  13  tubs, 
92^  ;  9  tubs,  92;  1  tub,  91 ;  2  tubs,  90y2.  Average  92.8.  Difference 
between  highest  and  lowest  score  Zl/2  points.  Greatest  variation  be- 
tween duplicate  tubs  \l/2  points. 

Newman,  Pasteurized.  2  tubs  scored  94 ;  3  tubs,  9Zl/2  ;  20  tubs, 
93 ;  12  tubs,  92y2  ;  12  tubs,  92;  11  tubs,  91.5 ;  8  tubs,  90.5 ;  5  tubs,  91 ; 
2  tubs,  90;  1  tub,  89.5;  1  tub,  88;  2  tubs,  86;  1  tub,  85.5.  Average 
score  91.8.  Difference  between  highest  and  lowest  score  9l/2  points. 
Greatest  variation  between  duplicate  tubs  2]/2  points. 

Unpasteurized.  2  tubs  scored  94 ;  7  tubs,  93^  ;  37  tubs,  93 ;  9 
tubs,  92.5;  15  tubs,  92;  5  tubs,  91.5;  1  tub,  91;  1  tub,  90.5;  3  tubs,  90. 
Average  92.6.  Difference  between  highest  and  lowest  scores  Zy2 
points.  Greatest  variation  between  duplicate  tubs,  2l/2  points. 

Woolverton,  Pasteurized.  11  tubs  scored  93.5,  30  tubs,  93;  9 
tubs,  92.5;  19  tubs,  92;  4  tubs,  90;  1  tubr  89;  3  tubs,  87;  3  tubs,  86. 
Average  92.1.  Difference  between  highest  and  lowest  score  7l/2  points. 
Greatest  variation  between  duplicate  tubs  6  points. 

Unpasteurized.  2  tubs  scored  94;  10  tubs,  93.5 ;  32  tubs,  93;  4 
tubs,  92.5 ;  18  tubs,  92;  4  tubs,  90;  2  tubs,  89;  1  tub,  88;  5  tubs,  87;  2 
tubs,  86.  Average  92.  Difference  between  highest  and  lowest  score 
8  points.  Greatest  difference  between  duplicate  tubs  5l/2  points. 

January  13,  1909,  this  lot  of  butter  was  again  scored  by  four  of 
the  same  men  who  scored  the  butter  July  14,  1908.  Mr.  D.  C.  Wool- 


1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN   MAKING  BUTTER 


411 


verton  was  absent  on  account  of  illness.  The  original  number  on  each 
tub  cover  was  removed  and  the  tubs  re-numbered  by  Messrs.  Jorgensen 
and  Hepburn,  as  indicated  by  the  number  in  the  first  column.  Each 
judge  worked  independently,  except  that  the  man  who  acted  as  his 
secretary  might  at  times  examine  the  same  trier  of  butter. 

TABLE  26.     RESULT  OF  THE  FOUR  JUDGES   WORK  OF  SCORING  THE  160  TUBS  OF 
BUTTER.  HELD  IN  CHICAGO,  JANUARY  13,  1909 


Pasteurized 

Unpasteurized 

Judging 

No. 

Original 

No. 

Mc- 
Kay 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Lee 

Mc- 
Kay 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Lee 

100 
116 

17 
123 

201 
203 
202 
204 

91.5 
91.5 
91.5 
91.5 

91.5 
91.5 
91.5 
92.5 

92.5 
93.5 
93.5 
93.0 

92.0 
91.5 
92.5 
92.5 

44 
106 
68 
26 

205 
207 
206 
208 

90.0 
91.0 
91.0 
90.5 

90.5 
92.0 
92.0 
92.0 

91.0 
89.5 
91.5 
92.5 

92.0 
92.0 
92.0 
92.5 

Av.  92.06 

Av.  91.37 

86 
127 
168 
16 

209 
211 
210 
212 

91.5 
91.5 
91.5 
91.0 

91.5 
92.5 
92.0 
92.0 

92.5 
92.5 
93.5 
90.0 

92.5 
92.0 
91.5 
92.0 

159 
37 
158 
96 

213 
215 
214 
216 

90.0 
90.5 
90.0 
91.0 

92.0 
91.0 
91.5 
90.5 

90.5 
92.0 
88.0 
90.0 

91.0 
91.0 
91.5 
91.5 

Av.  91.87 

Av.  90.75 

3 
160 
22 
29 

217 
219 
218 
220 

90.0 
90.0 
91.0 
91.0 

90.5 
90.5 
90.5 
90.5 

89.0 
89.0 
92.0 
91.0 

90.5 
90.5 
91.5 
92.0 

67 
126 
75 
112 

221 
223 
222 
224 

/• 

90.5 
91.5 
90.0 
90.5 

92.0 
88.0 
91.5 
91.5 

92.5 
87.0 
91.0 
89.0 

92.5 
90.5 
91.5 
90.5 

Av.  90.59 

Av.  90.62 

65 
121 
146 
84 

225 
227 
226 
228 

91.5 
90.0 
90.5 
91.5 

91.5 
91.5 
91.5 
91.5 

91.5 
92.0 
89.5 
90.5 

91.5 
91.5 
91.0 
92.0 

102 
18 

1 
24 

229 
23l 
230 
232 

90.5 
90.5 
91.5 
90.5 

91.5 
91.0 
92.0 
92.0 

91.5 
91.0 
89.0 
92.0 

92.0 
91.0 
91.5 
91.5 

Av.  91.18 

Av.  91.18 

412 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


TABLE  26 — Continued 


Pasteurized 

Unpasteurized 

Judging 

No. 

Original 
No. 

Mc- 
Kay 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Lee 

Mc- 
Kay 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Lee 

83 

233      i   91.5 

91.5 

93.0 

91.5 

98 

235 

91.0 

91.0 

92.0 

92.5 

88 

234 

90.0 

92.0 

91.5 

92.0 

28 

236 

89.5 

91.5 

9-2.0 

92.5 

99 

237 

90.5 

91.0 

91.5 

92.0 

90 

239 

• 

90.0 

91.5 

92.5 

92.0 

59 

238 

90.5 

92.0 

91.0 

91.5 

119 

240 

90.0 

91.5 

89.0 

91.0 

Av.  91.56 

Av.  91.09 

70 

241 

1 
90.0      91.5 

92.0 

92.0 

71              234 

90.5 

91.0 

92.5 

91.5 

51              242 

91.5 

91.5 

91.5 

92.0 

56      .        244 

91.0 

92.0 

92.0 

92.5 

130             245 

i 

91.0 

92.0 

90.0      91.5 

151              247 

90.5 

92.0 

91.5 

91.5 

63 

246 

91.5 

91.5 

89.5 

88.0 

74 

248 

92.0 

92.5 

91.5 

91.5 

Av.  91.56 

Av.  91.12 

69 

248 

91.0 

91.5 

91.0 

91.5 

33 

251 

91.0 

92.0 

89.0 

91.5 

165 

250 

91.25 

92.0 

91.0 

91.5 

161 

252 

91.0 

-92.0 

90.5 

92.0 

150 

253 

91.5 

91.5 

89.5 

91.5 

14 

255 

92.0 

92.0 

92.5 

90.5 

188 

254 

90.5 

91.0 

87.0 

91.0 

2 

256 

86.0 

90.0 

85.0 

90.0 

Av.  91.23 

Av.  90.09 

'  53 

257 

91.5 

91.5 

91.5 

92.0 

- 

9 

259 

91.75 

92.0 

90.5 

92.5 

143 

258 

90.0 

92.0 

88.0 

92.0 

60 

260 

91.5 

92.0 

90.0 

92.0 

101 

261 

91.0 

92.0 

87.0 

91.5 

50 

263 

90.5 

91.5 

90.5 

91.0 

148 

262 

91.0 

92.0 

88.0 

91.0 

91 

264 

90.5 

91.5 

89.0 

91.0 

Av.  91.29 

Av.  90.56 

1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


413 


TABLE  26 — Continued 


Pasteurized 


Unpasteurized 


Judging    Original 
No.             No. 

Mc- 
Kay 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Lee 

Mc- 
Kay 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Lee 

139 

265 

90.0 

91.5 

90.5 

91.0 

na 

267 

91.75 

92.0 

91.5 

92.0 

34 

266 

91.0 

91.5 

92.5 

92.0 

* 

32 

268 

90.5 

92.0 

91.5 

92.0 

134 

269 

90.5 

91.0 

91.5 

89.0 

92 

-  271 

90.5 

92.0 

92.0 

92.0 

149 

270 

'90.0 

91.5 

89.0 

91.5 

10 

272 

91.0 

92.0 

87.0 

92.0 

Av.  91.45 

Av.  90.78 

55 

273 

92.5 

91.5 

91.5 

92.5 

31 

275 

90.5 

92.0 

91.5 

92.5 

19 

274 

92.0 

92.0 

89.0 

92.0 

12 

276 

91.5 

92.0 

91.5 

92.0 

57 

277 

89.0 

91.5 

90.0 

9f.O 

8 

279 

91.5 

92.0 

89.0 

91.5 

137 

278 

90.5 

92.0 

91.5 

92.0 

93 

280 

90.5 

92.0 

91.5 

92.0 

Av.  91.65 

Av.  91.09 

162 

281 

91.5 

91.5 

92.0 

92.0 

40 

283 

89.5 

91.5 

90.0 

92.0 

52 

282 

90.5 

91.5 

90.5 

91.5 

38 

284 

91.5 

90.5 

90.0 

92.0 

154 

285 

90.0 

92.0 

89.0 

92.0 

142 

287 

. 

90.5 

92.0 

88.0 

90.5 

97 

286 

90.0 

92.0 

87.0   i   91.0 

39 

2SS 

91.5 

92.0 

88.0      91.0 

Av.  91.12 

Av.  90.40 

82 

289 

91.0 

92.0 

89.0 

92.0 

45    . 

291 

89.5 

'91.5 

90.0 

92.0 

167 

290 

90.5 

91.0 

91.0 

92.0 

80 

292 

91.0 

91.5 

92.0 

92.0 

132 

293 

90.0 

91.5 

90.0 

92.0 

114 

295 

89.5 

91.5 

89.0 

92.0 

49 

294 

90.0 

90.5 

89.0 

92.0 

170 

296 

90.0 

92.0 

89.0 

91.0 

Av.  91.06 

Av.  90.56 

414 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


TABLE  26 — Continued 


Pasteurized 

Unpasteurized 

Judging 
No. 

Original 
No. 

Mc- 
Kay 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Lee 

Mc- 
Kay 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Lee 

42 
124 
46 
81 

297 
299 
298 

300 

92.0 
91.0 
90.0 
91.0 

91.5 
92.5 
91.0 
92.0 

92.5 
90.0 
91.5 
91.5 

92.0 
91.5 
91.5  - 
92.0 

47 
72 
169 
211 

301 
303 
302 
304 

91.0 
90.0 
90.5 
91.5 

91.0 
91.0 
92.0 
92.0 

90.0 
91.5 
88.0 
91.5 

92.0 
92.0 
91.5 
91.5 

Av.  91.47 

Av.  91.06 

76 
107 

7 
6 

305 
307 
306 
308 

90.5 
90.0 
92.0 
90.5 

91.0 
92.5 
92.0 
92.0 

91.5 
91.5 
92.0 
92.0 

91.5 
92.5 
92.5 
92.0 

155 
105 
35 
103 

309 
311 
310 
312 

90.0 
92.0 
91.5 
90.5 

92.0 
92.0 
92.0 
92.0 

91.5 
91.5 
91.5 
92.0 

91.0 
92.0 
92.0 
91.0 

Av.  91.62 

Av.  91.55 

166 

13 
79 
128 

313 
315 
314 
316 

91.5 
91.5 
91.0 
91.5 

91.5 
92.0 
91.5 
92.0 

92.0 
90.0 
90.5 
89.0 

92.0 
91.5 
92.0 
91.5 

125 
78 
4 
23 

317 
319 
318 
320 

89.0 
89.0 
90.5 
92.0 

91.5 
91.5 
92.0 
92.0 

88.0 
89.0 
91.0 
90.5 

91.0 
92.0 
92.0 
92.5 

Av.  91.31 

Av.  90.84 

144 
113 
21    . 
141 

321 
323 
322 
324 

90.0 
89.5 
91.5 
91.0 

91.5 
91.5 
91.5 
90.0 

91.0 
90.0 
91.0 
91.5 

91.5 
92.0 
92.5 
92.0 

145 
129 
140 
136 

325 
327 
326 
328 

91.0 
89.5 
91.0 
90.5 

92.0 
90.0 
92.0 
91.5 

91.5 
89.5 
89.0 
92.0 

91.5 
92.0 
91.5 
89.5 

Av.  91.12 

Av.  90.87 

1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 
TABLE  26 — Continued 


415 


Pasteurized 

Unpasteurized 

Judging 

No. 

Original 
No. 

Mc- 
Kay 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Lee 

Mc- 
Kay 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Lee 

64 
66 
62 
152 

329 
331 
330 
332 

90.5 
90.5 
87.0 
89.5 

90.5 
91.5 
89.0 
89.5 

87.0 
87.0 
88.0 
87.0 

91.0 
89.0 
89.0 
89.0 

133 
135 
36 
164 

333 
335 
334 
336 

90  .  0'' 
91.55* 

87.0 
89.0 

90.0 
90.5 
89.0 
89.0 

87.0 
87.0 
86.0 
87.0 

91.5 
89.0 
89.0 
89.0 

Av.  89.06 

Av.  88.97 

94 
54 
25 
156 

337 
339 
338 
340 

91.5 
92.0 
91.0 
91.0 

92.0 
91.5 
92.0 
92.0 

92.5 
92.0 
92.5 
90.5 

92.5 
92.0 
92.0 
92.0 

109 
'  147 
111 
117 

'341 
"343 
342 
344 

91.5 
90.5 
92.5 
91.0 

92.0 
92.0 
'92.5 
91.5 

91.5 
90.0 
91.5 
88.0 

91.0 
92.0 
92.0 
89.0 

Av.  91.81 

Av.  91.15 

122 
87 
131 
30 

345 
347 
346 
348 

90.5 
90.5 
91.0 
91.5 

92.0 
92.0 
92.0 
92.0 

91.0 
92.0 
88.0 
92.0 

92.0 
91.5 
91.5 
92.5 

104 
11 

153 
115 

349 
351 
350 
352 

91.5 
92.0 
91.0 
91.0 

92.0 
92.0 
92.5 
91.0 

89.0 
91.0 
90.0 
89.0 

92.0 
92.0 
92.0 
91.0 

Av.  91.37 

Av.  91.18 

157 
163 
20 
110 

353 
355 
354 
356 

91.0 
91.0 
92.0 
91.0 

91.5 
91.0 
89.0 
89.0 

89.0 
91.5 
86.0 
88.0 

90.5 
91.5 
89.0 
91.5 

95 
73 
58 
89 

1    357 
359 
358 
360 

89.5 
88.0 
87.0 
89.5 

91.0 
90.0 
88.0 
88.0 

86.0 
85.0 
84.0 
86.0 

92.0 
91.0 
86.0 
87.0 

Av.  90.15 

Av.  88.0 

Average 

90.89 

91.47 

90.84 

91.71 

90  .  44 

91    41 

89    62 

91    18 

Gain.  .  .  . 

0.45 

0.06 

1.22 

0.53 



416 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


TABLE  27.    COMPARISON  OF  PASTEURIZED  AND  UNPASTEURIZED  BUTTER  AFTER  STOR- 
AGE, BASED  UPON  SCORES  OF  JANUARY  13,  1908,  CHICAGO 


Pasteurized 

Unpasteurized 

Vat 
No. 

Mc- 
Kay 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Lee 

Mc- 
Kay 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Lee 

1 

91.50 

91.75 

90.37 

92.12 

90.62} 

91.67} 

91.12| 

92.12* 

2 

91.37 

92.00 

92.12 

92.00 

90.37*   :   91.25f 

90.12} 

91.  25} 

3 

90.50 

90.50 

90.25 

91.12 

90.62-j 

90.75f 

89.87} 

91.251 

4 

90.87 

91.50 

90.87 

91.50 

90.75- 

92..62f 

90.87* 

91.50* 

5 

90.50 

91.50 

92.12 

92.12 

90.25; 

91.50* 

91.00} 

91.62} 

6 

91.75. 

91.50 

92.12 

92.00 

91.25- 

92.00f 

90.62- 

90.62} 

7 

91.06 

91.87 

90.37 

91.62 

90.00: 

91.12} 

88.50; 

90.75} 

8 

91.18 

91.87 

90.00 

92.12 

90.75: 

91.75}      88.  62} 

91.12} 

9 

90.81 

91.75 

91.50 

91.75 

90.50 

91.62}   I   89.87} 

91.12- 

10 

91.62 

91.87 

90.87 

92.25 

90.37: 

91.87* 

90.50} 

91.62- 

11 

90.75 

91.25 

90.62 

91.87 

90.50 

92.00-J- 

88.00- 

91.12- 

12 

90.50 

91.37 

90.37 

92.00 

89.87} 

91.37* 

89.25: 

91.75" 

13 

91.00 

91.75 

91.37 

91.75 

90.75| 

91.50} 

90.25: 

91.75* 

14 

90.75 

91.87 

91.75 

92.12 

91.00f 

92.00-f- 

91.62: 

91.50: 

15 

91.37 

91.75 

90.37 

91.75 

90.12} 

91.75* 

89.62; 

91.87- 

16 

90.50 

91.12 

90.87 

92.00 

90.50* 

91.37t 

90.501 

91.12- 

17 

89.37 

90.12 

87.50 

89.50 

89.37* 

90.00} 

86.75} 

89.75- 

18 

91.37 

91.87 

91.87 

92.12 

!    91.37* 

92.00t 

90.25} 

91.00- 

19         90.87 

92.00 

90.75 

91.87 

91.37f 

91.87} 

89.75} 

91.75: 

20      !   91.25 

90.12 

88.62 

90.62 

88.50} 

89.25} 

85.25} 

89.00: 

*Butter  made  from  both  the  pasteurized   and   unpasteurized  cream   after  storage, 
received  the  same  average  score. 

iHigher  score  for  the  pasteurized  butter, 
tfllgher  for  unpasteurized  butter. 

The  above  table  is  compiled  from  Table  26.  The  average  of  the 
scores  on  the  four  tubs  of  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized  cream, 
Vat  1,  by  McKay,  was  91.50;  Crawford,  91.75;  Newman,  90.37;  and 
by  Lee,  92.12.  '  The  butter  made  from  the  same  cream  unpasteurized, 
received  the  following  average  scores:  McKay,  90.62;  Crawford, 
91.67;  Newman,  91.12  and  Lee,  92.12.  Two  of  the  judges  placed  a 
higher  average  score  on  the  pasteurized,  one  on  the  unpasteurized  but- 
ter, and  the  fourth  judge  placed  the  same  score  on  both  lots. 


1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


417 


Q  2 

S  S 

w  <; 

><  5 

t-H  <H 

in  < 

H  ^ 

H  g 


• 

1  S- 
,3  E-- 


H     H 


w  « 

Q 


< 

H 


K 


S5 

o  o 


10  10 

cooocoONCXJcocococococOoooOONCOoocoooooco 


d^^d 


O  to       to  to 


0s  O\  0s  ON  ON  ON  ON  ON  ON  ON  ON  ON  ON  ON 


**************** 


c      .     .    .  .    .  o     .  <         o  c      .  o 


ONONOOoOoOONOOcQONCOoOCOONONOOoOcQONOOoO 


VT)  LO  IT)  IO 


3£    7 i ^  i  i  ^ 


1       1       I       1       1       1       1 


-  - 

i    O    ft 
I    *H    rt 


Kffi 


Reading  across  the  page  tubs  201  to  204  pasteurized  and  205  to 
208  unpasteurized,  represent  one  comparison  with  all  butter  from  the 
same  cream. 

January  13,  the  average  of  the  320  scores  placed  upon  the  butter 
made  from  the  pasteurized  cream  was  91.22,  while  the  average  of  the 
same  number  of  scores  placed  upon  the  unpasteurized  butter  was 
90.71. 

The  average  of  all  the  scores  placed  on  the  same  butter  July  14, 
was  92.16  for  the  pasteurized  and  92.31  for  the  unpasteurized. 

The  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized  cream  scored  0.15  of  a 
point  lower  July  14  as  compared  with  the  butter  made  from  the  cream 
which  was  not  pasteurized  and  six  months  later  the  butter  made  from 


418 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September. 


the  pasteurized  cream  scored  0.51  of  a  point  higher  than  the  butter 
from  the  unpasteurized  cream.  This  indicates  that  pasteurizing  the 
cream  increased  its  keeping  quality  by  two-thirds  of  a  point.  In  com- 
paring the  average  of  each  day's  make  it  is  evident  that  on  only  one 
day  did  the  butter  made  from  pasteurized  and  unpasteurized  cream  re- 
ceive the  same  average  score.  On  two  days  it  was  higher  for  the  un- 
pasteurized. On  seventeen  days  the  score  was  in  favor  of  the  pasteur- 
ized cream. 

Comparing  McKay's  average  for  each  day,  gives  three  days  the 
same,  four  in  favor  of  unpasteurized  and  thirteen  in  favor  of  the  pas- 
teurized. 

Crawford's  average  gave  four  days  the  same,  seven  in  favor  of 
unpasteurized  and  nine  days  in  favor  of  pasteurized. 

Newman's  average  gave  one  day -the  same,  one  in  favor  of  unpas- 
teurized and  the  other  eighteen  days  in  favor  of  pasteurized. 

Lee's  average  gave  three  days  alike,  three  in  favor  of  unpasteur- 
ized and  the  other  fourteen  in  favor  of  pasteurized. 

TABLE  29    VARIATION  IN  SCORE  ON  DUPLICATE  TUBS  JANUARY  13,  1909 


Extent  of  variation 

0 

X 

H 

I 

1H 

1M 

2 

2M 

2H 

3 

3H 

4 

4^ 

SK 

McKay 

Past. 

11 

2 

14 

5 

4 

1 

2 

1 

Unpast. 

6 
17 
18 

— 

14 
IS 

10 

9 
6 

7 

6 

2 

2 

— 



1 

Craw- 
ford 

Past. 

2 

Unpast. 

3 

1 

1 

New- 
man 

Past. 

8 

9 

11 

1 

6 

3 

1 

1 

Unpast. 

4 

4 
19 
7 

11 

5 

9 

3 

3 

„ 

1 

Lee 

Past. 

13 

6 

12 

1 

1 

Unpast. 

14 

1 

2 

1 

2 

1 

1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


419 


V 

o 

A"rt 

•S| 

o 

O 

M 

p 
3 

S 

&« 

3 

<L> 

bo 
B 
rt 

3 

De- 
crease 

£ 
^ 

,-(  r-K,-l     O 

-1     55 

-»^« 

^?5 

J3 
O 

*    X- 

| 

^o    X 

&*" 

\«\N 
CS  CN  rt\i-t\ 
•*  ^ 

rt 

In- 
crease 

- 

x| 

d 
,3 

^ 

X 

^ 

•eJ 

<u 
M 

•n 

<u 

53 

De- 
crease 

PO  l-KfH\ 

ro  ^ 

U 
O  to  PO 

5? 

>-?\CN  "-^ 
10         CN 

>-K       r<5  IH\ 

\^ 

•**       CN  CO 

^^^^ 
fOCN^ 

1 

tn 

rt 

a, 

TJ 

c. 

1 

In- 
crease 

(U 

M 
d 
3 
jB 

P 

& 

3 

u 

,   <2 

si 

S"^ 

-^5? 

o 

O   Tjl    ^    ^4 

a 

5«-x 

\«\«\« 

CS)  t-K»-i\r^\ 

^H^ 
r-i\ 

S 

M 

In- 
crease 

0) 

to 
a 

oi 
q 

X 

0)    0) 

be  bo 
B  B 
rt  rt 

^2  ,C 

o 

a 

0> 

,  « 

sl 

u 

v\^< 

ff)     O  1-<N-HN 

g-rs 

_  \^_ 

*^  r-\^ 

*•? 

u  u 
-00^ 

^^ 

N^NNNC^ 

fSJ  rH\rH\f^\ 

T-l   «-l   CN 

«**« 

:P   0 

H£ 

in  t-»  <3  OO 
O  O  O  O 
cs  r^cs  cs 

ro  i^)  ^<  O 
«N  CN  CN  CN 

'-t  fO  CN  TJ< 
CN  CN  CN  CN 
CN  CN  CN  (N 

O  —  O  CN 
CN  fO  fO  fO 
CN  CN  CN  CN 

t^-   O   OO  O 
CO  CO  (»5  TJ< 
CN  CN  CN  CN 

l/    t^  \O  OO 
CN  CN  CN  CN 

8 

u 

B  co 

1—  1    )-< 

o 

a> 
M 

a 
j 

<U     0)           \M 

bo  60     f-K 

c  c     — 
rt  cs 

,r|  ,(-; 

(1)                  O 

bo          bo 

rt           rt 
r;           r 

<u 

bfl<N 
Q 

rt 

<l)               CO 

bo          bo 
B           B 
rt            rt 

-C              J= 

^ 

,  s 

«| 

S^S 

^5- 

U    U 
0  0~ 

KX 

u           o 

ls-| 

Xf^ 

o          o 

o-<^o 
J3         J5 

a 

rt 

B  1 

-  b 

^^^ 

$ 

x^ 

0)               iU 

bo^,       bo 
B            B 
rt            rt 

<u  <u 
bo  bo     »-< 
B  B 
rt  rt 

X 

1 

5 
fc 

De- 
crease 

J 

$R     - 

55 

0               0 

O      -^O 

&     ™Z, 

o  o 
o  o^ 

^^ 

5^  5 

'asteuri 

•d 
c 

I 

In- 
crease 

0) 

bo 

rt 
,fl 

HH 

r 

rt 
E 
O 

v 
i  w 

2g 

555^ 

5«— 

5*-- 

o 
\^ 
-,  o-^  — 

K" 

5—  X 

^    ^ 

I-KCS  r-\,_. 

£ 
M 

In- 
crease 

Sl 

B 

a 

I 

^ 

IU 

bo 

B 
rt 

.a 

u 

S 

De- 
crease 

*#*>. 

0 

^^o^ 

\-          \r|.\^ 

«\  CN  "-Ki-iX 
CN          ^  f-l 

o 

0«N^ 
^        M 

*-«£ 

»s- 

:P  0 
HZ 

•M  fO  (M  rj<     I 
O  O  O  O 
CS  CS  CN  (N     1 

O  —•  O  CN 

o  —  —  —  « 

CN  CS  CN  (N 

1^-  O  OO  O 
CN  CN  CN  CN 

to  i^  \O  OO 
CN  CN  CN  CN 
CN  CN  CN  CN 

fO  >o  «*"  *O 
ro  fO  fO  fO 
CN  CN  CN  CN 

•*«  <r>  CN  T*< 

•*  •<*  rj<  rj< 
CN  CN  CN  CN 

420 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


_4> 

V 

3 

» 

bo 

bo 

«  <8 

•i-t  CN  *-< 

*»J- 

-.xxs 

»- 

O  CN  *-KrR 

-1^ 

55      ^ 

I'*" 

c 

In- 
crease 

TJ 

0) 

2 

o 

fc 

<u 

.*»* 

NO  co  >O  co 

5— 

Nfl             \ff< 
i-K^n  fs  J\ 

•<*<  •*  vo      : 

*— 

^,X 

I 

f 

•   I 

HH    Wi 
O 

<u 

-If 

rj 

P 

1 

'      I 

>Xi-l   CN    CO 

—  * 

O 

^^ 

XS-- 

*;*- 

-*- 

£ 

In- 
crease 

* 

a 

a 

o 

^1 

-*-* 

»f^ 

^Jg^ 

»    H 

^^ 

CN  »H 

o 

!?  0 

?f)if>  •*&  \O 

«-i  CO  CN  ^ 

O  •rt  O  CN 

It^  ON  00  O 

lo  t^  \O  OO 

co  tf)  ^1"  sO 

-H  CO  CN  •* 

H^5. 

CN  CN  CN  CN 

CN  CN  CN  CN 

CNCNCNCN 

CN  CN  CN  CN 

CN  CN  CS  CN 

CN  CN  CN  CS 

s 

In- 
crease 

bo^—  *  r^N.  bo 

0            ^-H     fJn 

rj                fl 

M 

V 

bo 
C 
OB 

q 

5 

0) 

^  c^ 

-*** 

O                O 

O              0 

5xcs 

o 

o 

O 

««* 

§ 

-   I 

- 

* 

** 

- 

1 

i 

J 

CN 

CS  CN 

5-  * 

-   ^ 

CN 

;x 

<er 

1 
P.I 

1 

In- 
crease 

- 

bo 
I 

0 

*>  2 

^  ^  ri^ 

S-S- 

^^     X 

?x— 

S^XX 

-x«x 

Xo*^ 

Q  b 

| 

In- 
crease 

1 

a 

? 

* 

p 

bfi 

c 

rt 
_q 

So 
c 
i 

bo          bo 

S        c 

cd 

J3              rrj 

o 

4J 

o 

-*«x 

-  2^ 

3»- 

O 

o 

^  CO  «J»H 

CJ                0 

^^^55 

g| 

ON  *-i  O  CN 

TJ<  LT)  IO  XO 
CN  CN  CN  CN 

t^  ON  OO  O 
<N  CN  CN  CN 

in  r^  vo  oo 

CS  CN  CN  CN 

CN  CN  CN  CS 

-H  CO  CM  •* 

oo  ob  oo  oo 

CS  CS  CS  CN 

ON  «-i  O  CN 
00  ON  O  ON 
CN  CS  CN  CN 

f-  ON  OO  O 
ON  ON  ON  O 
CN  CN  CS  CO 

1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


421 


In- 

crea'e 

- 

0 
M 

a 

| 

De- 
crease 

--*, 

5«x 

—? 

H5 

5-^^ 

ja 

VC^^X 

_y/i^\\O  "} 

« 

rt 

In- 
crease 

3 

1 

a> 
55 

«l 

*£-& 

™ 

55*x 

\N      \^<l 

5»XT 

•-^CN  CO  T}< 

«-?N.OO  O  r^ 

ft 

-d 

«H 
O 

T 

u 

u 
bo 

03 
r< 

x 

P 

i 

E 
O 

&l 

-W—  . 

CN  CN  -H  ^H 

v^'Sl* 

O 
»-(    O  ^co 

5-  5 

-^ 

•^H  CO 

M 

0) 

1—  1    IH 
O 

0) 

1 

3 

1  -» 

s 

^NN 

03 

o 

a 

De- 
crease 

•-K.-C   *—  1  i-K 
CN                    ^ 

0 

to  to      >2* 

CO  M 

x-^ 

o 

O^! 

O 

^H     O            »R 

v*1 

CO  "SvO  CO 

:P  o 

ON  »H  O  CN 

t^  ON  00  O 

to  r^  \O  00 

CO  UT^   NO 

»H  to  CN  Tj« 

ON  '-i  O  CN 

I--.  O>  OO  O 

CO  CO  to  CO 

CO  CO  to  to 

to  <O  co  to 

CO  co  co  to 

CO  to  CO  CO 

co  co  to  co 

CO  to  to  co 

o 

t) 

bo 

CD    0) 

c  c1 

a!  o3 

* 

0)    0) 

bo  bo 

X 

De- 
crease 

5*** 

0 

0    0 

" 

o  o 

-Tfg 

-XT* 

§ 

In- 
crease 

~* 

CD 

bo 
C 
o! 

»H  CN  «-K 

- 

| 

fc 

,  8 

•48 

S 

O 
^  CN  CN  CO 

-3S 

- 

XCRX 

CN  *-<  --K 
•        CO 

\«<i    ^i^1 

CN          O  ^* 

asteuri 

•s 

0 

G  a; 

X 

Mn 

C 

O 

De- 
crease 

**" 

*— 

5-5- 

CN  CN 

^•.-x 

^^^^ 

--^CN  CN  CN 

1 

In- 
crease 

<U 

So 

OS 
q 

U 

O 
o3 
9 

o 

De- 
crease 

CN  C*)'-^<>1 

555* 

0 

O 

& 

•5*** 

*..£. 

^~~~ 

:P  0 

to  r^  \o  oo 
O  O  O  O 

CO  CO  CO  CO 

co  IO  ^  vO 
fO  CO  CO  <O 

CN  CN  CN  CN 
CO  CO  CO  CO 

O  i-l  O  CN 
CN  CO  CO  CO 
CO  CO  CO  CO 

l^  ON  OO  O 
co  co  co  ^ 
CO  CO  CO  CO 

ir>  r»  vo  oo 

CO  W1   Tj<    VO 

to  co  to  co 

422  BULLETIN  No.  138  [September, 

RESULT  OF  SCORING  NEW  YORK  LOT  OF  BUTTER,  DECEMBER  31,  1908. 

As  soon  as  the  butter  had  been  tempered  after  coming  out  of 
storage  it  was  scored  by  four  judges  working  independently.  Accord- 
ing to  Kieffer,  the  butter  made  from  the  cream  which  was  pasteurized 
received  an  average  score  of  90.52,  while  the  butter  made  from  cor- 
responding lots  of  cream  not  pasteurized,  received  an  average  score  of 
89.77 ;  an  average  of  0.75  of  a  point  in  favor  of  the  pasteurized  butter. 

According  to  the  scores  placed  upon  the  same  butter  by  Smarzo, 
the  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized  lots  of  cream  received  an  aver- 
age score  of  91.12  and  the  butter  from  unpasteurized  cream,  an  aver- 
age score  of  89.68,  or  a  difference  of  1.44  of  a  point  in  favor  of  the 
pasteurized. 

Crawford's  average  score  of  the  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized 
cream  was  91.27  and  the  unpasteurized  90.69,  an  average  of  0.58  of  a 
point  in  favor  of  the  butter  made  from  pasteurized  cream. 

Lee's  average  on  the  same  butter  was  91.15  for  the  pasteurized 
and  90.67  for  the  unpasteurized  or  0.48  of  a  point  in  favor  of  the  but- 
ter made  from  pasteurized  cream. 

The  average  of  the  scores  placed  upon  the  four  tubs  of  pasteurized 
butter  for  each  day  compared  with  the  average  of  the  four  tubs  of  cor- 
responding butter  from  unpasteurized  cream  gives  the  following  daily 
data.  ! 

KIEFFER'S  DAILY  COMPARISON 

There  was  no  difference  in  quality  between  pasteurized  and  unpas- 
teurized butter  for  two  days;  thirteen  days  from  0.5  to  3  points  in 
favor  of  the  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized  cream,  and  on  the  other 
five  out  of  the  twenty  days  the  average  score  was  higher  by  one-fourth 
to  one  and  one-fourth  points  for  butter  made  from  the  cream  that  was 
not  pasteurized.  Comparing  Kieffer's  score  on  the  eighty  individual 
tubs  of  pasteurized  butter  with  the  corresponding  tubs  of  butter  from 
the  unpasteurized  cream  the  following  results  were  obtained : 

13  tubs  compared,  same  score;  18,  one  point  in  favor  of  pasteur- 
ized; 14,  two;  6  three;  6,  four;  1,  five;  and  1,  seven  points.  In  9 
tubs  compared,  the  butter  made  from  the  unpasteurized  cream  scored 
higher  by  one  point;  8  tubs  higher  by  two  points;  1,  three  points; 
2,  four,  and  1,  five  points. 

The  variation  in  score  on  duplicate  tubs  was  as  follows:  There 
was  no  difference  in  the  score  on  duplicate  tubs  of  butter  packed  from 
11  churnings  of  pasteurized  and  5  churnings  of  unpasteurized  cream; 
15  pasteurized  and  10  unpasteurized,  one  point  variation  in  score;  4 
pasteurized  and  15  unpasteurized,  two  points;  6  pasteurized  and  7  un- 
pasteurized, three  points ;  1  pasteurized  and  2  unpasteurized,  four ;  2 
pasteurized  and  1  unpasteurized,  five  points. 

SMARZO'S  DAILY  COMPARISON 

There  was  no  difference  in  quality  between  pasteurized  and  unpas- 
teurized butter  for  one  day.  On  only  two  days  out  of  the  other  19 


1909]  PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER  423 

did  the  average  score  on  the  four  tubs  of  unpasteurized  butter  range 
higher  than  the  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized  cream.     Comparing 
individual  tubs  of  pasteurized  with  unpasteurized  butter,  we  find  that 
7  out  of  the  80  comparisons  show  no  difference  in  quality.     In  66  of 
the  comparisons  the  butter  made  from  the  cream  which  was  pasteur- 
ized scored  higher  by  one-half  to  6l/2  points  while  the  other  7  scored 
higher  in  favor  of  unpasteurized  butter  by  one-half  to  three  points. 
Smarzo's  variation  on  duplicate  tubs  as  follows: 
No  difference  in  score  on  duplicate  tubs  of  butter  packed  from  15 
churnings  of  pasteurized  and  8  of  unpasteurized  cream. 

14  pasteurized  and  7  unpasteurized,  one-half  point  variation;  6, 
pasteurized  and  14  unpasteurized,  one  point;  2,  pasteurized  and  1  un- 
pasteurized one  and  one-half;  2  pasteurized  and  7  unpasteurized,  two; 
1  pasteurized  and  1  unpasteurized  two  and  one-half ;  1  unpasteurized, 
three  points ;  and  1  unpasteurized,  four  points. 

CRAWFORD'S  DAILY  COMPARISON 

Both  the  pasteurized  and  unpasteurized  butter  scored  the  same  on 
two  of  the  20  days.  The  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized  cream  on 
14  of  20  comparisons  scored  higher  by  0.12  to  2.37  of  a  point,  while 
on  the  other  four  days  the  butter  made  from  the  unpasteurized  cream 
scored  higher  by  0.12  to  0.38  of  one  point. 

Comparing  the  individual  tubs  of  each  lot,  it  will  be  noticed  that 
17  comparisons  showed  no  difference.  Forty-seven  out  of  the  80, 
scored  higher  for  the  pasteurized  by  one-half  to  four  points,  while  in 
the  other  16  the  pasteurized  scored  higher  by  one-half  to  two  and  one- 
half  points. 

The  variation  in  score  on  duplicate  tubs  was  as  follows : 

The  tubs  packed  from  14  churnings  of  pasteurized  and  14  of  un- 
pasteurized cream,  no  variation.  12  pasteurized  and  13  unpasteurized, 
one-half  points;  5  pasteurized  and  7  unpasteurized,  one  point;  9  pas- 
teurized and  1  unpasteurized,  one  and  one-half;  2  unpasteurized,  two 
and  one-half ;  2  unpasteurized,  two ;  and  1  unpasteurized,  three  points. 

LEE'S  DAILY  COMPARISON 

On  two  out  of  the  20  days  there  was  no  difference  in  the  average 
scores  placed  upon  the  4  tubs  of  pasteurized  butter  as  compared  with 
the  average  of  the  4  tubs  of  unpasteurized  butter.!  The  butter  made 
from  the  pasteurized  cream  received  on  the  other  18  days  an  average 
score  of  0.12  to  1.87  points  higher  score  than  the  butter  made  from 
the  unpasteurized  cream.  Comparing  the  individual  tubs,  there  was 
no  difference  in  24  out  of  the  80  comparisons.  Forty-seven  pasteur- 
ized tubs  scored  higher  than  corresponding  unpasteurized  tubs.  The 
other  9  comparisons  scored  higher  for  the  unpasteurized  butter  by  one- 
half  point. 

Variation  on  duplicate  tubs  as  follows : 

15  pasteurized  and  15  unpasteurized,  no  variation.  18  pasteurized 
and  12  unpasteurized,  one-half  point  variation;  7  pasteurized  and  8 


424 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


unpasteurized,  one  point;  1  unpasteurized,  one  and  one-half;  3  unpas- 
teurized, two;  and  1,  two  and  one-half  points. 

As  previously  stated  the  first  eight  tubs  of  butter  were  made 
May  6,  and  the  last  eight  July  1.  The  first  40  tubs  shipped  to 
New  York  were  not  placed  in  the  regular  storage  rooms  as  soon  as 
intended  on  account  of  Mr.  Kieffer's  absence  from  the  city. 

The  following  table  shows  when  each  shipment  reached  New  York 
City,  also  when  the  tubs  of  butter  were  scored  by  Kieffer  and  then 
placed  in  storage. 


Date 
Reed,  by 

No. 

When 

When 

Date 
Reed,  by 

No. 

nf 

When 

When 

Gude 
Bros. 

tubs 

scored 

stored 
1908 

Gude 
Bros. 

tubs 

scored 

stored, 
1908 

May  20 
June     1 

32 

24 

June  5 

June     5, 
5, 

June  24 
July     1 

32 
24 

June  25 
July     3 

June  25, 
July     3, 

8 

16 

"     12 

"       12, 

7 

16 

9 

9, 

"      IS 

16 

"     25 

"       25, 

1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


425 


03    (U 

t^ 

to 

O 

o 

G  3 

O  ON  ON  -H 
ON  00  00  ON 

00 

ON  »-C  r-t  *-H 

00  ON  ON  ON 

O 
ON 

O  CM  O  CN 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

T-H 

ON 

p  <u 

• 

lj 

ll 

<J 

<J 

.< 

_0> 

•d 

Jj    N 

to 

O 

to 

n*'E 

PH  ^ 
+j 

00  ON  O  ^ 
00  00  ON  ON 

ON 

oo 

O  O  CM  O 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

O 
ON 

03    0) 

nS   si 

\o  vo  to  O 

Jo 

OOOO 

O 

O  O  O  >0 

00 

|| 

CS  CS  C<»  (N 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

cs 

ON 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

co 
ON 

co  co  co  CS 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

0) 

J 

,| 

OOOO 

0 

OOOO 

O 

18  1 

CO  CO  CO  CO 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

co  co  co  co 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

co 

ON 

&* 

rH  CO  CM  Tj< 
(N  CM  CS  (N 

to  r~  NO  oo 

<N  CM  CS  CS 

ON  T-I  O  CN 
<N  CO  co  CO 

co  co  co  CO 

«•-  ON  00  O 

CO  CO  CO   Tf< 

03  m 

to 

to 

rt  N 

C^'C 

»H   »-l  O  '-I 

O 

00  0  -<O 

ON 

Q  d 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

OO  ON  ON  ON 

00 

1 

P£ 

> 

$ 

3 

-d 

to 

to 

03  ,N 

_J  O  -H  ON 
5;  ON  ON  00 

O 
ON 

ON  ON  O  ~4 
00  OO  ON  ON 

ON 
00 

OOOO 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

d 

ON 

1 

$ 

^ 

< 

Si 

to  to  to  o 

CN 

NO 

O  O  to  O 

CM 

J 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

<u 

03    N 

VO  10  10  10 

10 

to  O  to  O 

to 
cs 

OOOO 

to 

rt'C 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

CS  CS  *-i  y-i 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

•§o 

OOOO 

VO  f-  NO  00 

OOOO 

ON  ~H  O  PM 

CO  10   Tt<    NO 

• 

r~  ON  oo  O 

426 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


^ 

ro  (^ 

0 

O 

0 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

ON 

CN  O4  CS  fN 

ol 

£g 

00  00  00  00 

00  00  00  00 

00 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

u 

+J 

^ 

^ 

^ 

V 

to 

_* 

^< 

^ 

•d 

o 

0 

|'S 
U 

ON  ON  ON  ON 
CO  CO  00  CO 

ON 
00 

Ol  (N  (N  (N 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

M 

ON 

A*g 

rt  N 

O 

O 

\r> 

- 

11 

CS  CS  (S  Cl 

ON 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

i| 

O  O  O  O 

O 

oj  'C 

ro  "5  PO  fO 

O 

ro  ro  fO  PO 

ro 

PH  ?3 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

' 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

* 

ON 

>, 

.0    • 

^.rocSTj< 

"1  »—  NO  CO 

^ 

ON  .H  O  0» 

PO"T*  NO 

l^  ON  00  O 

^ 

«•*«•« 

NO    NO    NO    NO 

NO  t"**  r~^  t^» 

^^^^ 

^^^^ 

i  TJ 

O 

cvr 

C4  (N  <N  (S 

CS 

ON  O  00  -* 

ON 

G  3 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

OO  ON  OO  ON 

00 

u 

P£ 

£ 

• 

o; 

tc 

•*< 

<J 

i     u 

t>. 

*s> 

O 

IJ 

0^5:5:5: 

O 

00  O\  ON  ON 

O 
ON 

ON  ON  ON  ON 
CO  00  00  00 

ON 
00 

*n 

<«ooo 

cs 

1-1 

O  *r>  O  m 

IO 

a-c 
^S 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

c*5 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

(S 
ON 

< 

> 

J 

-d 
J,S 

O  O  O  10 

oo 

toOOO 

2 

O  vo  O  O 

<N 

NO 

fc| 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

SN 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

cs 

ON 

_ 

> 

< 

^ 

•§° 

^««J 

IO  t^*  vO  CO 

ON  ~*  O  <N 
^«  10  ir>  i/^ 

CO  m  *&  O 

1^-  ON  OO  O 
to  ID  VO  \O 

H^ 

«««« 

•*-*^"* 

^^.^.^ 

^•^^^ 

^TfTj.^ 

1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


427 


in   <l> 

O 

O 

O 

rt    N 

a'C 

C    3 

(N  CS  (N  CN 

cs 

ON 

O  O  O  O 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

O 

ON 

OOOO 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

O 
ON 

u. 

^   3J 

M   ^ 

< 

| 

< 

3 

T3 

o 

o 

in    N 

P-i    3 

0000 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

0 
ON 

O  O  OO 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

o 

ON 

•2 

> 

> 

<n  U 

™    N 

to  to 

to 

cs 

to  to  to  to 

If) 

co 

O 

11 

co  CO  co  co 

CO 
ON 

CO  CO  CO  CO 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

CO  co  CO  co 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

°1 

"* 

> 

<d 

Pj 

< 

"^ 

0 

V 

i   N 

to  to  to  to 

to 

oooo 

co 

rt  'u 

co  co  co  co 

ro 

co  co  co  co 

ON 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

V 

4 

< 

•&  6 

•^H  co  (N  •* 

0000 

IO  t^.  NO  OO 

O  O  O  O 

ON  ^H  O  <N 

CO  to  "4*  NO 

t»»  ON  OO  O 
rt  rt  rt  (N 

H' 

to  10  to  »o 

to  to  to  to 

to  to  to  10 

to  io\o  to 

,  *d 

o 

rt  N 

.... 

•      •      • 

O 

£'§ 

C4  CS  <N  <N 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

CS  fS  <S  CN 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

cs 

ON 

t)  <1> 

j^ 

<u 

<J 

> 

ts 

<J 

u 

2 

,1 

<N 

o 

3-S 
^  S 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

d  (N  n  CM 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

<N  CS  O  tN 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

-p 

< 

< 

> 

i  T) 
tn  a) 

rt      N 

O 

to  to  to  to 

to 

&'C 

n  M  c-»  ™ 

CNJ 

(N  04  tS  <N 

cs 

P| 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

3 

•g 

cn  N 

O  O  O  O 

O 

to  to  to  to 

IO 

O  O  O  O 

O 

3-| 

CS  CN  <N  (N 

CN 

CM  r*>  cs  ri 

CS 

CO  co  co  co 

co 

0) 

4a 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

*° 

00  OC  00  OO 

IO  t~-  NO  OO 

OO  00  OO  00 

ON  ^  O  <^ 

00  ON  ON  ON 

co  to  »#  NO 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

t^  ON  00  O 
ON  ON  ON  O 

H^ 

^^^Tj. 

^^^^ 

-t^^^ 

«5t««<« 

'*'*"*  "> 

428 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


2  t> 

O 

O 

to 

00 

g^S 

ON!  fN  CN  <N 

CN 

CM  CM  CM  CM 

CM 

ON 

O 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

ON  OO  00  OO 

OO 

ON 

P    4) 

u 

< 

•5 

<J 

5 

t3 

£| 
p  j    rt 

CS  CS  CN  CM 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

O 

CM 
ON 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

0 

ON 

d 

ON 

-2 

jj 

^ 

en   D 

«     N 

vo  to  to  vo 

to 

to  to  to  to 

.0 

to  to  to  to 

10 

ON 
00 

5    3 

p  £) 

ss^s 

CO 
ON 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

co  CO  co  CO 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

CO 
ON 

ON 

<J 

<; 

•< 

£ 

•n 

, 

Jj 

1       -^ 

to  to  to  to 

l-O 

to  to  to  to 

l-O 

I"*" 

!2  *^-* 

Q-t    3 

co  CO  co  co 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

» 

CO  CO  CO  CO 
ON  ON  O  ON 

ON 

T? 

** 

^ 

•5 

1 

;§0 

^-H  CO  CN  T}< 

10  t>-  NO  00 

ON  ^H  O  CM 

to  to  to  to 

t^.  ON  00  O 

to  to  to  NO 

"ell 

j 

to  to  10  10 

to  to  to  to 

to  to  to  to 

IE 

«—  1 
CO 

[/I    0) 

O 

O 

C3 

c8    N 

3 

C^'C 

CM  CM  CM  CM 

cs 

CM  CM  CM  CM 

c^ 

H 

31 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

V 

^J 

^\ 

*» 

"^ 

*^ 

5 

T3 
i     4) 

O 

O 

O 

rt  'H 
PM   3 

OJ  CN  fN  fN 

CM 

ON 

O  CM  O  CM 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

CM  CM  CM  CM 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

CM 
ON 

w 

> 

5 

| 

09    D 

O 

O 

fc-e 

G    ^ 

CM  CM  CM  CM 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

«s 

ON 

O  O  O  O 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

O' 

3 

T3 

0000 

O 

O  O  O  O 

O 

_„, 

10 

-2 

(N  (N  (N  (N 

* 

0  O  0  0 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

CO  co  co  co 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

CO 

ON 

•So 

»-i  CO  (N  •* 

to  r^  NO  oo 

ON  rt  O  CM 
CM  CO  co  co 

CO  CO  CO  CO 

t-  ON  00  O 
co  co  co  "^ 

H^ 

10  10  to  to 

to  to  to  to 

to  to  to  to 

to  to  to  to 

to  to  to  to 

1909]  PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER  429 

These  160  tubs  of  butter  were  taken  out  of  the  cold  storage  rooms 
December  26,  and  placed  in  a  tempering  room.  December  30  the 
butter  was  judged  by  Lee  and  Crawford  in  the  presence  of  one  of 
the  employees  of  the  firm  of  Gude  Bros,  and  on  the  following  day 
scored  by  Messrs.  Kieffer  and  Smarzo.  Previous  to  the  scoring,  the 
helper  removed  the  number  which  had  been  placed  on  each  tub  cover 
at  the  time  it  was  made.  The  number  which  had  been  placed  on  the 
bottom  of  the  tub  was  left  for  identification.  Each  tub  was  given  a 
new  number,  running  from  1  to  160.1  The  tubs  were  not  identified 
until  all  scores  had  been  placed.  In  no  case  did  a  judge  know  what 
score  had  been  given  by  another  judge  until  his  score  had  been  re- 
corded. 

The  result  of  this  scoring  is  as  follows : 


430 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


o 

J 

in 

-idd  — 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

to  to 

00^  ~ 

ON  ON  ON  O\ 

\ 

—  c  ON  -H  O 
ON  CO  ON  ON 

iurizec 

^"2 

2o 

o 

to 

0  —  0  — 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

CN 

O 

o> 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

CC 
r^. 

O 

do  —  — 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ir. 
l>. 

ON 

1 

a 
a 
j-j 

Smarzo 

IO 

ON  o  ON  ON 
oo  ON  oo  oo 

^ 

to 

O  «-*  <N  O 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

^ 

t^  00  O  O 
00  00  ON  ON 

> 

<5 

i 

V 

3 

O  (N  O  ~ 

00  ON  ON  ON 

O\  —i  04  O 

OO  ON  ON  ON 

r^  •—  i  ^H  ON 

00  ON  ON  00 

V 
V 

to  tr>  to  in 

O  O  -H  -H 
ON  00  O  ON 

10 

10  to  10  to 

—  O  O  -H 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

j-o 
2S 
u~ 

to         IO 

O  ON  -H  O 

O\  00  O\  ON 

0 
ON 

S 

to 

(D  ^  -^  C3 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON 

NO 

d 

o 

IO 

•-I  —i  CO  CN 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

(N 
CN 

-a 

8 

'H 

Smarzo 

to 

O  —  O  -H 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

< 

to  to  >o  to 

•—  c  ON  O  •—  ' 
ON  00  ON  ON 

> 
< 

10  to  to  to 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

< 

V 

In 
a 

P* 

Kieffer 

^  O  —  O 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

O  O  <-H  ^ 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

—  i  CN  ON  -H 

ON  ON  CO  ON 

1^ 

voi^NOoOON«-<OCN 
CNCNCNCNCNPOPOPO 

rOto-^NOt^-ONOOO 
POPOfOPOPOPOPO^J1 

—croCNrfior^NOOO 

i| 

C/JZ 

oo  •—  <  O  ON  to  to  CN  to 

—"t^POCNCO—ltoCN 

Tj<-*NOlO<N-H(MrJ< 

«N  1-1  -^  CS  r-<  rt  T*I 

•*O  —  —  CNPOONt^- 
-<  -H  CN  rO        •*         ^ 

u 

jj 

to 

^  -^  o  ~ 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

to  to  to 

~  do  d 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

OO  OO  O  ON 
OO  OO  ON  00 

surizec 

^"2 
2o 
u~ 

to 

O   -H   —   -H 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

10 

NO 

0 

to            to 

do  —  o 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

NO 
vo 

ON 

t^  r^  ON  O 

OO  OO  OO  ON 

CO 
<M 

CO 

1 

a 
^ 

Smarzo 

to 

O  O  ON  -H 

ON  ON  OO  ON 

ON 

> 

< 

to 

ON  CO  00  ON 

oo  oo  oo  oo 

4 

to 

ON  t^-  l^  "H 

00  00  00  ON 

< 

Kieffer 

•H  CN  —  <  ON 
ON  ON  ON  00 

ON  00  t^  O 
CO  00  00  ON 

to  CO  OO  ON 

OO  OO  OO  CO 

V 

2 

to 

ON  ON  ON  O\ 

to  to 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

O! 

to 

—  —  do 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

& 

i-2 

to       to 

CS  «-H  CN  —" 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

0 

to  vo 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

CN 

d  —  d  — 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

CN 

d 

T3 
4) 
N 
'C 

Smarzo 

to 

(V)   ,-1   r-l   -H 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

^ 

to  to  to  to 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

> 
< 

to 

O  ON  —  O 
ON  00  ON  ON 

< 

(U 

i 

Hi 

Kieffer 

»-•  O  ON  O 
ON  ON  00  ON 

OO-i  — 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

O  O  ON  O 
ON  ON  00  ON 

•3° 

—if^CN^iOt-^vOOO 

ON-nOCNfOtorfNO 

^••ONOOO  —  POCN'i1 

H2 

T^   ^    ^   ^    T^   ^*   ^   ^< 

Tf-^-^T^TjCTt'*-!* 

«««"*««•«« 

JN 

rOOONOONOrOPOvO 
«^-csr^(NPO-H<v]fs 

OO  r^  ON  f**  ^  OO  ^  ON 
POPO—'NOcONOr^NO 

PO^J<t--.lOOPOt>.ON 

to  to  CS  to  t-»             rf) 

1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


431 


u 
u 

J 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

If)  in  in  If) 

—  '  O  —  i  O 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

ir>ir>v> 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

surizec 

*T3 
«  t; 

k-     0 

O 

10  m  10 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

CN 

in  in 

1-1  —  <  --i  00 
ON  ON  ON  00 

«# 

ON 
00 

IO         IO 

•-"  CN  rt  CS 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

^ 

O 

a 

& 

a 
a 

Smarzo 

in 

CN    -H    -H    -H 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

> 
< 

00  00  O  O 
00  00  OO  O 

>' 

< 

•-"  •-!  O  00 
ON  ON  ON  OO 

> 
< 

Kieffer 

•-i  CN  00  CN 
ON  ON  00  ON 

OO  —«  t^  10 

00  O  00  00 

O  <N  O  CN 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

u 

V 

10       in 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

»o 

.-i  CN  >-i  .-1 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

10         IO 

CN  —i  <N  i-i 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

S-a 

2S 
u1" 

IO  10  IO 

—  i  rt  ^H  CN 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

ro 
<* 

10       in  in 

O  CN  "H  ^H 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

01 
ON 

in 

CS  —  l  CN  CN 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

00 

cs 

ON 

-d 

s 

u 

Smarzo 

in  in       m 

-H    -H   CN    -H 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

> 

< 

IO 

O  —  i  CN  *-H 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

^ 

m  in  10  in 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

< 

0 

i 

Hi 

Kieffer 

r-H    ^H    —  1    CN 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

ON  -H  -H  CN 
00  ON  ON  ON 

CS  t^  CS  ON 
ON  00  ON  00 

3° 

roin^vOt-^ONOOO 

.-irOCNTj<inr-»NOOO 

ON^HOCNrom^NO 

H^ 

^^^^^^^^ 

^^^.^ 

^^^^^^^^ 

°4 

\O^Ot^fO^O^^t~» 
--HOCNONOOOO 

ONrommO^ONO 
ON  -H  O  —  <  -<f  •—  on  O 

O'-<ONfONOONNO°2 

vo^H-^TtcNioin^, 

t/22 

U 

3 

10             m 

O  OO  •—  i  >—  « 
ON  00  ON  ON 

>-H    >—  (    O    •—  1 

O  ON  OO  ON 

IO 

J  o  ^  — 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

T3 
O 
N 

'u 

3 

*"2 
2° 
o 

OO  ON  O 
ON  ON  00  ON 

0 
IO 

ON 

to         IO 

ON  ON  OO  O\ 

0 
0 

O 

IO 

«-«  <N  —i  O 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

O 

o 

i 

(X 

a 

Smarzo 

VO   IO    -H    1— 

OO  OO  ON  ON 

< 

10 

ON  OO  ON  ON 
OO  OO  00  OO 

> 

< 

IO  IO 

—  0  0  — 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

> 

<3 

Kieffer 

ON  t^  CN  CN 

00  00  ON  ON 

00  ~-t  O  CN 
00  ON  ON  ON 

^H    (N    ^    O 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

V 

J 

in 

—  C    —    O   -H 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

IO  IO  »O 

_'  J  o  ^ 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

IO 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

*"H 
2  o 
o"" 

IO         IO 

^0-^0 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

•* 
O 

ON 

IO         IO 

O  ON  O  CN 
ON  00  ON  ON 

CM 

NO 

0 
ON 

IO  IO  IO 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

t^ 

00 
0 

T) 
V 

N 

c 

Smarzo 

10  in 

~*  »—  (  CN  --^ 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

< 

m 

!J  O  ON  ON  ^H 
ON  00  00  ON 

< 

IO         10 

1—  1    -H    O    •—  1 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

> 

<< 

« 

V) 

rt 

OH 

Kieffer 

CN  O  CN  O 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

^  --  CS  O 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

00  —  <  O  —  < 
OO  ON  ON  ON 

& 

ON-HOCNromr^NO 
^t<  in  in  in  in  in  10  in 

J^ONOOO  —  <r>CN-* 
ir>  to  10  ^O  O  O  NO  NO 

lOt^NOOOON-^OCN 

vONOONONOr^t^-r— 

U 

'Jl** 

cococN'-iinNOoONO 
<r>  ^  ro                   •* 

-HtN^Oior^ONOO 

TT'TjtOONOOOlOf^OO 

OONCS—  ir^oot^t^ 
^moONOr—  t-~oOTi< 

432 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


V 

3 

to       to  vr> 

O-H  o  o 
o>  ON  ON  ON 

to  to 

O  O  00  ON 

ON  ON  00  OO 

to  to 

O  O  ON  ^ 
O>  ON  OO  ON 

jurizec 

*T3 

rt  *« 

i-    O 

CJ- 

to  to  to 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

NO 

0 
0 

OO  O  00  OO 
00  ON  00  00 

t^. 

CO 

00 

to  to       to 

O  ~H  oo  O 

ON  ON  OO  ON 

es 

t^ 

ON 

in 

& 
a 
•3 

Smarzo 

O\  -H  O  OO 
00  O  ON  00 

ji 

ON  OO  t—  ON 
OO  OO  OO  00 

< 

OO  ON  ON  »-l 
OO  OO  OO  ON 

> 
< 

Kieffer 

i-(  t-~  ON  ON 
O»  00  00  00 

NO  NO  ON  OO 

OO  OO  OO  00 

t^  O  ON  »H 
00  ON  00  ON 

II 

3 

IO  IO 

^-H  ^-H  O  *-l 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

to 

*<!  v<  d  o 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

to       to 

O  *-<  '-'  "-1 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

*T3 

2S 
U~ 

to 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

CN 

to 

»-l     T-l     >-H     O 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

CM 

t—  1 

O 

to       to 

•t-H  »H  t-H  CS 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

oo 

TH 

-a 

8 

n 

Smarzo 

to  <o  to 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

< 

O  O  O  O 
O»  ON  ON  ON 

< 

to           to 

»-l  <N   CS    •r-l 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

< 

.2 

tn 

rt 

£ 

Kieffer 

Q\  ON  ON  ON 

O  ON  00  ON 
ON  00  00  00 

•rt  O  ON  CN 

ON  ON  OO  ON 

•§° 
HZ 

T-iroe^-^vot'.NOoO 
<N<NCSCSCS<NCNCS 

ioioto»oto»oto>o 

ON--iO<NCOiOTt<NO 
CSrOfOcorOfOfOm 
toiotoiotoioioto 

I^ONOOO'-ifO<N'* 
fOCOCO'*'*^'^'* 

totoioiotoiototo 

ti 

0   ° 

J* 

ONOCN'--HrONO*-ltO 
lOONt^ONOOOOOOf~ 

OOOCSONNONO-*-^ 
lOONON-^tONOONNO 

ONOfO'-'l'^CNCOlO 

OOOOOMONONONOON 

• 
• 

IO 

^H  ^-l  <N  •-! 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

10  10  to  IO 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

to      «o 

v->  «-H  »-H  «-l 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

pazuiu 

£-0 
2S 
p* 

*O 

—I  CS  CN  tN 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

<N 

0) 

to 

CS  n  CN  i-H 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

CN 

to 

CM  •rt  ^  CS 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

NO 
0 

ON 

"S 
i 

&, 
a 
a 

Sm»rzo 

IO 

»-C    .—  1    l—  1    O 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

< 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

< 

00  »H  ^  0 
OO  ON  ON  ON 

< 

Kieffer 

ON  -H  CN  -H 
00  ON  ON  ON 

O  O  ON  <N 
O\  ON  OO  O\ 

00  O  ~H  O 
00  ON  ON  ON 

u 

3 

XO  «O  10 

O\  ON  ON  ON 

to  to  to 

<-i  «-H  "H  <N 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

to  to 

T-t    T*    <N    (N 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

h 

i-   O 

O~ 

IO 

CN  CN  CN  -* 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

NO 

0 

to      to 

CN  1-1  (SJ  "i 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

CN 

r^ 

to  to 

CM  CN  ~H  «-l 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

NO 

»-l 

ON 

T3 

.§ 

'C 

Smarzo 

<N  —  i  ~  -H 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

> 

< 

ff   IO         IO 

CN  -H  (N  —i 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

4 

to       to 

T-I  fN  '-i  CS 
ON  ON  ON  ON 

< 

£ 

en 
3 

PH 

Kieffer 

»^  CN  t-c  ON 
00  ON  ON  00 

CS  (N  —i  (N 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

^H    ^H   CS    T* 

ON  ON  ON  ON 

•Sri 

t^ONOOO'-'fOCNr}' 

XOt^NOOOON-*O<M 

cOto^NOr^ONOOO 

HZ 

r^  T}<  T^  lo  IO  IO  IO  vo 

1O  IO  IO  IO  to  to  to  to 

to  to  to  to  to  to  to  to 

Stf 

OOf«OO<NOONO(Nt^ 
roioioroON^JHio^ 

T)<t--.OOt^~*lOON<N 
•*CNCNtO-^-<tO)O 

ojOlooo^-<Ol/^»-' 

Tj«cotOlOlO^-lCSCO 

tn'2' 

ro 

3 

n 
< 


1909]  PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 

TABLE  32 — Continued 


433 


Pasteurized 

Unpasteurized 

Score 
No. 

Tub 

No. 

Kieffer 

Smarzo 

Craw- 
ford 

Lee 

Kieffer 

Smarzo 

Craw- 
ford 

Lee 

134 

545 

91. 

92. 

92. 

91. 

137 

547 

92. 

92. 

92. 

91.5 

122 

546 

89. 

92. 

91. 

91.5 

135 

548 

92. 

91.5 

92. 

91.5 

133 

549 

91. 

91. 

91.5 

91. 

136 

551 

92. 

91. 

92. 

91.5 

118 

550 

88. 

87. 

91.5 

91. 

117 

552 

90. 

88. 

91.5 

91.5 

Av.  91.5 

Av.  90.59 

123 

553 

90. 

91. 

91.5 

92. 

108 

555 

92. 

91. 

91.5 

91. 

121 

554 

92. 

90.5 

90.5 

90.5 

109 

556 

88. 

88. 

91.5 

91. 

124 

557 

90. 

91. 

90. 

91. 

119 

559 

91. 

90. 

88. 

90.5 

112 

558 

90. 

92. 

91. 

90.5 

154 

560 

92. 

91.5 

91. 

91.5 

Av.  90.75 

Av.  90.68 

Average.  .  .  . 

90.52 

91.12 

91.27 

91.15 

89.77 

89.68 

90.69 

90.67 

Gain  

0.75 

1.44 

0.58 

0.48 

TABLE  33    COMPARISON  OF  PASTEURIZED  AND  UNPASTEURIZED  BUTTER  AFTER  STOR- 
AGE, BASED  UPON  SCORES  OF  DECEMBER  30,  31,  1908,  NEW  YORK 


Pasteurized 

Unpasteurized 

Vat 
No. 

Kieffer 

Smarzo 

Craw- 
ford 

Lee 

Kieffer 

Smarzo 

Craw- 
ford 

Lee 

1 

90. 

91.37 

91.75 

91.12 

90.75t 

90.12} 

90.87} 

90.87: 

2 

90.5 

91.5 

91.25 

91.25 

88.50} 

88.62; 

90.5  } 

90.62: 

3 

89.25 

90.12 

90.5 

90.62 

87.5  } 

88.62: 

88.25} 

88.75: 

4 

90.5 

90.62 

90.25 

90.62 

90.5  * 

89.37' 

90.62-f 

90.62s1 

5 

90.5 

90.75 

90.62 

91. 

90.5   * 

90.87- 

91.      t 

90.75:| 

6 

90.75 

91.5 

91.62 

91. 

89.5  : 

88.75: 

90.5   } 

90.25: 

7 

91. 

91.5 

90.75 

90.87 

90.      : 

88.25: 

89.75} 

90.25: 

8 

91. 

89.87 

90.5 

91.12 

90.25: 

88.87} 

90.75t 

90.5  : 

9 

90. 

91. 

91.37 

91.12 

91.25- 

90.75} 

91.12} 

90.87: 

10 

91.25 

91.37 

91.62 

91.25 

90.75: 

91.37* 

91.37} 

91.     : 

11 

90.75 

91.12 

91.37 

91.37 

87.75: 

88.75} 

90.5  } 

91.     : 

12 

90. 

91.5 

91.87 

91.75 

91.      ' 

90.      } 

91.75} 

91.37: 

13 

89.75 

91.25 

91.87 

91.37 

90.75- 

90.87} 

91.87} 

91.37s1 

14 

91.75 

91.75 

91.75 

91.62 

90.25: 

91.      } 

91.87t 

91.5  3 

15 

91.25 

91.75 

91.75 

91.75 

89.75: 

90.      } 

91.62} 

91.5  : 

16 

91. 

91.37 

91.12 

91. 

89.     : 

89.5   } 

91.12* 

90.62: 

17 

89. 

90. 

90.87 

90.62 

87.25: 

88.25: 

88.5   } 

89.5   : 

18 

90.5 

91.75 

91.5 

91. 

89.25: 

89.25: 

90.12} 

90.25: 

19 

91. 

91.87 

91.75 

91.37 

90.25: 

89.25: 

91.62} 

91.25: 

20 

90.5 

90.12 

91.25 

91.12 

90.75- 

91.12- 

90.00} 

90.87; 

•Butter  made  from  both  the  pasteurized  and  unpasteurized  cream  after  storage, 
received  the  same  average  score.  ^Higher  score  for  the  pasteurized  butter,  tHigher 
for  uupasteurized  butter. 


434 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


Table  33  is  compiled  from  Table  32.  The  average  of  the  scores 
on  the  four  tubs  of  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized  cream,  Vat  1, 
by  Kieffer,  was  90.00;  Smarzo,  91.37;  Crawford,  91.75,  and  by 
Lee,  91.12.  The  butter  made  from  the  same  grade  of  cream  unpas- 
teurized,  received  the  following  average  scores,  Kieffer,  90  75  ;  Smarzo, 
90.12;  Crawford,  90.87  and  Lee,  90.87.  One  of  the  judges  placed  a 
higher  average  score  on  the  unpasteurized  butter  while,  the  other  three 
judges  favored  the  pasteurized  butter. 


w  o2 
&  2 


M  «" 

a  a 

W  H 

O  H 


ffi 


CO       W 


CO 


OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOvOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 


c/ 


.0 


dco.jd^d 


oi 


1      1      1      1      1      1      1      1 

-'CSt^u">r'3OOt^ 

O'-'tNrOTfTfio 


oi 


OOOOOoOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO 


do 


10       vo  «n 


1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


435 


TABLE  35    DIFFERENCE  IN  QUALITY  OF  BUTTER  MADE  FROM  PASTEURIZED  AND  UN- 
PASTEURIZED  CREAM,  ACCORDING  TO  EACH  JUDGE 


Vat 
No. 

Kieffer 

Smarzo 

Crawford 

Lee 

Past. 

Unpast. 

Past. 

Unpast. 

Past. 

Unpast. 

Past. 

Unpast. 

1 

0.75 

1.25 

[0.88 

0.25 

2 

*  2.0 

2.88 

0.75. 

0.73 

3 

1.75 

1.50 

2.25 

1.87 

4 

Same 

1.35 

0.37 

Same 

5 

Same 

0.12 

0.38 

0.25 

6 

1.25 

2.75 

1.12 

0.75 

7 

1.00 

3.25 

1.00 

0.62 

8 

0.75 

1.00 

0.25 

0.62 

9 

1.25 

0.25 

0.25 

0.25 

10 

0.50 

Same 

0.25 

0.25 

11 

3.00 

2.37 

0.87 

0.37 

12 

1.00 

1.50 

0.12 

0.38 

13 

1.00 

0.38 

Same 

Same 

14 

1.50 

0.75 

0.12 

0.12 

15 

1.50 

1.75 

0.13 

0.50 

16 

2.00 

1.87 

Same 

0.38 

17 

1.75 

1.75 

2.37 

1.12 

18 

1.25 

2.50 

1.38 

0.75 

19 

0.75 

2.62 

0.13 

0.12 

20 

0.25 

1.00 

1.25 

0.25 

This  Table  differs  from  Table  33  in  that  the  extent  of  difference 
is  shown  in  place  of  average  score.  According  to  Kieffer,  for  two 
comparisons  the  average  score  of  the  four  tubs  of  pasteurized  was  the 
same  as  the  average  score  of  the  four  tubs  of  unpasteurized  butter. 
Average  for  thirteen  comparisons  was  in  favor  of  the  butter  made 
from  the  pasteurized  cream  and  the  other  five  were  in  favor  of  the 
butter  made  from  the  unpasteurized  cream. 

According  to  Smarzo,  for  two  comparisons  the  average  score  for 
the  butter  made  from  both  the  pasteurized  and  unpasteurized  cream 
was  the  same;  17  days  in  favor  of  pasteurized  and  two  in  favor  of 

TABLE  36    VARIATION  IN  SCORE  ON  DUPLICATE  TUBS  DECEMBER  30-31,  1908 


Extent  of  variation 

0 

H 

1 

1^ 

2 

2^ 

3 

3^ 

4 

^A 

5 

Kieffer 

Past. 

11 



15 

7 

4 

1 

2 
1 

Unpast. 

5 

10 

15 

7 

2 

Smarzo 

Past. 

15 

14 

6 

2 

2 

1 

—  — 



Unpast. 

8 

7 

14 

1 

7 
2 

1 

1 

1 

Crawford 

Past. 

14 

12 

5 

9 

Unpast. 

14 

13 

7 

1 

2 

1 

Lee 

Past. 

15 

18 

7 

Unpast. 

15 

12 

8 

1 

3 

1 

436  BULLETIN  No.  138  [September, 

unpasteurized  butter.  According  to  Crawford,  two  days  the  same,  14 
in  favor  of  pasteurized  and  four  in  favor  of  the  unpasteurized  butter. 
According  to  Lee,  two  days  the  same,  and  all  the  other  eighteen  com- 
parisons received  a  higher  average  for  the  butter  made  from  the  pas- 
teurized cream. 

According  to  Lee,  two  tubs  of  the  pasteurized  butter  scored  the 
same  at  both  scorings.  One  tub  of  the  pasteurized  butter  and  two  of 
the  unpasteurized,  scored  one-half  of  a  point  higher  after  storage. 

Two  tubs  of  butter  Nos.  533-535  packed  from  the  same  churn- 
ing June  16,  scored  90  June  17,  and  90.5  December  30.  Tubs  Nos. 
534-536  packed  from  churning  No.  2  from  same  vat  of  unpasteur- 
ized cream,  scored  90,  June  17,  and  January  30,  88-89  respectively. 
The  remaining  153  tubs  (Nos.  534-536  included)  scored  lower  Decem- 
ber 30,  to  the  following  extent:  6  tubs  pasteurized  and  2  unpasteu- 
rized, one-half  point;  12  tubs  pasteurized  and  9"  unpasteurized,  one 
point;  15  pasteurized  and  11  unpasteurized,  one  and  one-half;  20  pas- 
teurized and  23  unpasteurized,  two  points;  12  pasteurized  and  11  un- 
pasteurized, two  and  one-half;  5  pasteurized  and  11  unpasteurized, 
three;  5  pasteurized  and  3  unpasteurized,  four  and  one-half  points;  3 
unpasteurized,  four  points,  and  5  unpasteurized,  four  and  .one-half 
points. 

The  following  results  were  obtained  by  comparing  KiefFer's  score 
on  this  butter  before  and  after  storage : 

20  tubs  pasteurized  and  15  tubs  unpasteurized,  did  not  change;  15 
tubs  pasteurized  and  16  unpasteurized,  decreased  one  point ;  5  tubs  pas- 
teurized and  10  unpasteurized  decreased  two  points;  8  tubs  pasteurized 
and  7  unpasteurized,  decreased  three  points ;  5  tubs  unpasteurized,  de- 
creased four  points ;  2  tubs  pasteurized  and  5  unpasteurized,  decreased 
five;  6  tubs  unpasteurized  decreased  6  points;  7  tubs  unpasteurized, 
decreased  7  points,  while  19  tubs  pasteurized  and  9  unpasteurized,  in- 
creased one  point;  8  tubs  pasteurized  and  5  unpasteurized,  increased 
two  points;  3  tubs  pasteurized  and  4  unpasteurized  increased  three 
points  and  1  tub  unpasteurized,  increased  four  points. 

There  was  a  greater  variation  between  Lee's  and  Kieffer's  score 
on  the  butter  before  storage  than  after.  This  in  a  measure  accounts 
for  the  number  of  tubs  of  butter,  that  according  to  Kieffer  did  not 
change  or  else  received  a  higher  score  after  storage. 

September  14  and  15,  1908,  the  creamery  located  at  Morrison, 
Illinois,  was  visited  for  the  purpose  of  making  a  comparison  of  the 
butter  made  from  pasteurized  and  unpasteurized  cream. 

September  14,  a  total  of  1858  pounds  of  cream  were  received. 
All  of  the  cream  when  mixed  in  the  receiving  vat,  contained  0.43  per- 
cent acidity  and  23  percent  of  fat.  The  flavor  of  the  cream  was  de- 
cidedly bad,  indicating  age  and  poor  care.  Much  of  it  was  lumpy 
when  delivered,  a  natural  condition  for  cream  from  three  to  five  days 
old  which  had  not  been  thoroly  stirred  and  containing  such  a  low  per- 
cent of  fat.  One-half  of  this  cream  was  pasteurized  to  a  temperature 
of  180°  F.  and  the  remainder  was  cooled  at  once  to  50°  F.  and  one  and 
one-half  hours  later  it  was  churned.  The  pasteurized  cream  was  also 


1909] 


PASTEURIZATION  A  FACTOR  IN  MAKING  BUTTER 


437 


cooled  to  50°  F.  and  held  at  that  temperature  for  12  hours.  The  cream 
curdled  when  pasteurized.  Loss  in  buttermilk  from  the  pasteurized 
cream  was  0.55  and  for  the  unpasteurized  0.20.  A  few  small  particles 
of  curd  were  noticeable  in  the  butter  made  from  the  pasteurized  cream, 
but  there  was  no  noticeable  difference  in  the  flavor  of  the  two  lots  of 
butter. 

The  2893  pounds  of  cream  delivered  September  15  contained 
nearly  the  same  degree  of  acidity  and  percent  of  butter  fat  as  that 
delivered  the  previous  day.  The  flavor  and  condition  of  this  cream  was 
poorer  than  that  of  September  14.  The  two  lots  were  treated  the  same 
as  on  the  previous  day  except  that  the  pasteurized  cream  was  held  only 
four  hours  at  churning  temperature.  Loss  in  buttermilk  from  the  pas- 
teurized cream  was  1.0  percent  and  unpasteurized,  one-tenth  of  one 
percent.  The  butter  made  on  this  day  from  the  pasteurized  lot  seemed 
to  have  a  cleaner  flavor  than  that  made  from  the  unpasteurized  cream. 

One  30  pound  tub  of  butter  was  packed  from  each  churning, 
marked — A  unpasteurized,  B  pasteurized,  for  September  14,  and  C 
unpasteurized,  D  pasteurized,  for  September  15. 

These  four  tubs  were  shipped  by  express,  September  16  to  Mon- 
arch Refrigerating  Co.,  Chicago.  i 

Federal  Inspector  Credicott  examined  this  butter  before  it  was 
placed  in  storage  and  gave  each  tub  the  following  score : 

A  unpasteurized  91,  B  pasteurized  92,  C  unpasteurized  89,  D  pas- 
teurized 87.  One  5  pound  box  of  butter  was  also  packed  from  each 
of  the  two  churnings  of  August  15  and  submitted  to  three  other  butter 
experts.  In  each  case  the  unpasteurized  butter  was  given  from  one  to 
three  points  higher  score. 

January  13,  when  the  regular  160  tubs  of  experimental  butter 
were  scored,  these  four  tubs  were  distributed  promiscuously  and  given 
the  numbers  as  indicated  in  the  following  Table: 


New 
number 

Original 
number 

Scores  by 

McKay 

Craw- 
ford 

New- 
man 

Lee 

Unpasteurized  

85. 

77. 
5. 
120. 

A 
B 
C 
C 

88. 
90.5 
86. 
86. 

88. 
88. 
87. 
90. 

86. 
86. 
85. 
87. 

89. 

87. 
86. 

87. 

Pasteurized  

Unpasteurized    .  . 

Pasteurized.  . 

These  tubs  could  not  by  appearance  be  distinguished  from  the  160 
storage  tubs.  i 

January  4,  6,  and  8,  1909,  six  tubs  of  butter  were  made  at  the 
University  creamery  representing  pasteurized  and  unpasteurized  but- 
ter from  the  same  grade  of  cream.  This  cream  was  handled  the  same 
as  in  previous  experiment.  The  butter  made  January  4,  was  packed  in 
tubs  marked  E,  pastuerized  and  F,  unpasteurized.  January  6,  G  pas- 
teurized and  H  unpasteurized.  January  8,  I  pasteurized  and  J  un- 
pasteurized. 


438 


BULLETIN  No.  138 


[September, 


These  tubs  reached  Chicago  January  12,  and  the  butter  was  scored 
with  the  regular  lot  January  13.  The  tubs  were  of  the  same  appearance 
as  the  other  164  tubs.  The  day  previous  to  shipping  this  butter  it  was 
decided  by  the  men  who  made  it  that  tub  E  should  score  94,  and  the 
other  five  93,  since  no  difference  in  flavor  could  be  detected. 

The  tubs  received  the  following  score  January  13. 


New 
number 

Original  number 

McKay 

Crawford 

Newman 

Lee 

27 

E   pasteurized  

91.5 

93. 

94.5 

94. 

61 

F  unpasteurized  

87.5 

93.5 

88. 

93. 

138 

G   pasteurized  

91.5 

93. 

88. 

93.5 

48 

H   unpasteurized  

89. 

91. 

87. 

93. 

43 

I    pasteurized  

91. 

90.5 

94.5 

93. 

15 

J,  unpasteurized  

91.5 

91. 

91. 

93. 

The  work  recorded  for  1905  and  1906  may  be  considered  as  a 
preliminary  study,  since  it  was  not  only  an  indication  of  what  we 
might  look  for  in  studying  butter,  but  also  a  means  of  working  out  a 
system  for  carrying  on  such  investigation.  The  average  for  these  two 
years  makes  it  apppear  that  some  conclusions  had  been  reached.  How- 
ever, when  individual  scores  are  compared  it  is  apparent  that  the  aver- 
ages are  the  result  of  one  judge  scoring  high  and  another  scoring  low 
on  the  same  tub  or  one  judge  scoring  a  comparison  high  on  one  day  or 
correspondingly  low  on  the  following  day.  This  led  to  the  system  fol- 
lowed during  the  years  1907  and  1908,  when  each  churning  was  repre- 
sented by  duplicate  tubs  and  the  scoring  done  by  several  judges  work- 
ing independently. 

During  the  whole  period  the  work  was  done  on  a  large  enough 
scale  to  eliminate  outside  influences.  In  looking  over  the  records  of 
judging  for  1907  and  1908,  single  instances  might  be  selected  which 
would  lead  one  to  believe  that  judging  is  very  inaccurate.  Such  in- 
stances should  not  be  used  to  condemn  the  whole  system  of  judging. 
Judging  butter  by  this  or  similar  methods  is  an  accurate  means  of  es- 
timating quality.  Speaking  collectively  the  work  of  the  judges  in  this 
experiment  is  notably  uniform  and  consistent. 

In  any  comparison  dealing  with  quality,  the  following  facts  must 
be  observed:  1.  The  experiment  must  be  conducted  on  a  large 
enough  scale  to  eliminate  outside  influences  affecting  flavor.  2.  Any 
comparison  of  unlike  conditions  must  be  secured  by  using  cream  of 
identically  the  same  grade.  This  means  that  a  lot  of  cream  must  be 
first  thoroly  mixed  and  then  divided  to  suit  the  comparison.  3.  Uni- 
formity must  be  followed  in  manipulation  of  churns.  4.  Butter  must 
be  represented  by  two  or  more  packages  for  each  churn.  5.  Quality 
should  be  determined  by  three  or  more  judges,  working  independently, 
with  no  knowledge  of  the  identity  of  the  tubs  or  the  nature  of  the 
experiment.  This  should  be  applied  not  only  to  experimental  work, 
but  to  any  contest  where  contestants  are  competing  for  a  prize. 


^^K^SI 


